The gift of tongues

[OzSpen]

my point was to highlight that there is a counterfeit speaking in tongues, too, that is rarely discussed; so if you accept that there must be a counterfeit, "ritual" tongues, then i would ask you to describe it in such a way so as not to seem cynical, which i guess i am not too good at, sorry, because imo Paul described the Pentecostal/glossololia kind that we have today in his passage "gurgling and cooing, like a baby."

Which i doubt a believer in glossololia would appreciate much, no doubt they might even term that "cynical."

bb,

I find your statement that Pentecostal glossolalia is "gurgling and cooing like a baby" to be blasphemous.

This is how Paul described glossolalia: 'For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit' (1 Cor 14:2 ESV).

That you would call the gift of tongues 'gurgling and cooing' when it is speaking to God, is profane, ungodly, unholy, and disrespectful.

I am not supporting the disorder in some Pentecostal and charismatic churches. Paul had to counter it in Corinth (1 Cor 14:40).

However, surely our attitude toward tongues should be the same as that promoter by Paul: 'Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues' (1 Cor 14:29 NIV).

Paul had the audacity to state this about his own glossolalia: 'I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you' (1 Cor 14:18 NIV). Are you promoting the view that Paul spoke with 'gurgling and cooing' more than all the Corinthians?

Your view is shipwrecked on the rocks of biblical revelation.

Oz

 

[bbyrd009]

I find your statement that Pentecostal glossolalia is "gurgling and cooing like a baby" to be blasphemous.

Ah, but it is Paul's statement, not mine. Wadr i find the experience of tongues as we practice it to be blasphemous myself, even though i can admit that i find this statement of Paul's to be strange and confusing (especially in any other context, wherein it cannot even be made to make sense).

It might be the difference in private prayer "groaning" and public utterances meant for a sign (for unbelievers not believers, let us note--another strike against babbling imo) but tbh i am not too interested in the debate any more, i am just countering here, and by all means believe what you like.

 

[bbyrd009]

That you would call the gift of tongues 'gurgling and cooing' when it is speaking to God, is profane, ungodly, unholy, and disrespectful.

i guess i would like to characterize it as pointing out that there is a counterfeit tongues also, which is widely practiced in the church, and leave it up to the individual to discern the truth.

but again Paul said that, not me, so i would be more interested in your response to Paul, as i am kind of still assimilating his statement there myself. It is in the..."expanded?" heck, can't think of the translation now, lol, so if you are not fam with it i'll get back to you, unless someone else beats me to it

 

[bbyrd009]

Paul had the audacity to state this about his own glossolalia: 'I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you' (1 Cor 14:18 NIV). Are you promoting the view that Paul spoke with 'gurgling and cooing' more than all the Corinthians?

no, i am promoting the view that Paul spoke in genuine tongues, not glossololia, even characterized as "xenoglossy" in Scripture--although i suspect that is symbolic--which concept today might best be reflected in the songs of David Byrne, or iow possibly speaking in plain English, to an English speaking audience, and yet no one can understand you because you are not saying anything that reinforces what everyone already believes, so there is a sense in which you cannot even be understood, like that possibly.

 

[bbyrd009]

a concept even reflected in the mundane--we can listen to an explanation of a process, say, in plain language, but can also easily misinterpret some phrase until "the light dawns on us" or we "see the light."

 

[Frank Lee]

It will be an exercise in futility to attempt to convince denominationalists that God never changes. That His gifts and calling are without repentance.

I have found that shaking off the dust of your feet is the only thing to do. If God through His word can't persuade them then who am I? We who have been baptized in the Holy Spirit and received gifts stand on one side of a bridge that has been crossed. The scoffers, taught by other naysayers and religious establishments, stand on the other. Yelling back and forth across that bridge is fruitless and not edifying. Only by pressing into God and seeking Him can a man find the difference between religious tradition and Biblical truth. Jesus tried to explain it to Nicodemus.

1 John 2:27 (NKJV)
But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.

To the naysayers I suggest you seek the Lord with all of your heart. I trust tradition finds no flaw in that suggestion, however based on past experience I can't be certain.

1 Corinthians 14:37-39 KJVS
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. [38] But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. [39] Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

To me the most amazing thing is that those ignorant of what they are speaking, do so with such authority! Amazing (scratches head while shaking it)

 

[Sword]

To the naysayers I suggest you seek the Lord with all of your heart. I trust tradition finds no flaw in that suggestion, however I can't be certain.

Well I would go as far as to say its still in our court to show them the gifts are real. None of the miniters in my village come near me now. They hate losing a fight. I aint there to fight . I just wanted to share with them that used to have time for me what is real. But they really dont want it. But as I grow in the gifts they will come back one day. when I am moving in maturity in the gifts and they see its real. Daeth will come to all our doors and there will be chances in the future to those who bend the knee and ask for help. Or they will lose family members, because God will not heal them. As He already paid for healing thorugh Christ at the whipping post. Dear Lord will you heal so sn so does not work. as we all know from past begging prayers of the past.

 

[101G]

Hmm just a short testimony, but i was around 10 maybe a little older when i got the gift of speaking in tongues, mum was still reading the bible to me at that point haha. 1 time she was reading the Bible to me in bed, and after she finished she laid hands on me, and asked God to give me the gift of tongues, and I started speaking in tongues, in an unknown language it was pretty awesome and i hadn't done it for a while after that though, but 1-2 years ago it came back to me and i have been doing it ever since, i believe I never lost it though, I just wasn't using it and now i am again. So praise God

GINOLJC, I haven't read all the post here, but reading the OP, I have one question, did you, or do you know what you and God spoke about, or did you ever have an interpreter?.

 

[Sword]

GINOLJC, I haven't read all the post here, but reading the OP, I have one question, did you, or do you know what you and God spoke about, or did you ever have an interpreter?.

Maybe you should read them all . Why would he need an interpreter?

 

[OzSpen]

Ah, but it is Paul's statement, not mine. Wadr i find the experience of tongues as we practice it to be blasphemous myself, even though i can admit that i find this statement of Paul's to be strange and confusing (especially in any other context, wherein it cannot even be made to make sense).

It might be the difference in private prayer "groaning" and public utterances meant for a sign (for unbelievers not believers, let us note--another strike against babbling imo) but tbh i am not too interested in the debate any more, i am just countering here, and by all means believe what you like.

bb,

You are not 'countering' mate. You are giving your own subjective interpretation. I wish you would deal with the Scriptures I provided to counter your judgment that Pentecostal glossolalia is "gurgling and cooing like a baby".

I give up expecting exegesis of the text when you are committed to what you describe as 'this statement of Paul's to be strange and confusing'.

Do you believe in the authority of Scripture or not? If you don't, you'll give us subjective interpretation over and over. If you do, you will seek to understand what the Scriptures state.

Oz

 

[101G]

Maybe you should read them all . Why would he need an interpreter?

in a private setting, an unknown tongue is between the one and God. 1 Corinthians 14:2 "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries". but in a public setting, 1 Corinthians 14:4 "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. 5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying". 1 Corinthians 14:26 "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. 27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret".

 

[OzSpen]

no, i am promoting the view that Paul spoke in genuine tongues, not glossololia, even characterized as "xenoglossy" in Scripture--although i suspect that is symbolic--which concept today might best be reflected in the songs of David Byrne, or iow possibly speaking in plain English, to an English speaking audience, and yet no one can understand you because you are not saying anything that reinforces what everyone already believes, so there is a sense in which you cannot even be understood, like that possibly.

bb,

Please demonstrate that from Scripture. You haven't done that in this response. Where do you find 'xenoglossy' in Scripture. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines xenoglossy as ' purported use (as by a medium) while in a trance state of a language unknown to the individual under normal conditions' (Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2017. s v xenoglossy).

Or, do you mean xenolalia and not xenoglossy? Xenolalia means to speak in many real languages.

Please show me where the words xenolalia and xenoglossy are used in the NT.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

i guess i would like to characterize it as pointing out that there is a counterfeit tongues also, which is widely practiced in the church, and leave it up to the individual to discern the truth.

but again Paul said that, not me, so i would be more interested in your response to Paul, as i am kind of still assimilating his statement there myself. It is in the..."expanded?" heck, can't think of the translation now, lol, so if you are not fam with it i'll get back to you, unless someone else beats me to it

How often do you go to Pentecostal/Charismatic churches to know that 'counterfeit tongues' is presented?

How do you discern the difference between true vs counterfeit tongues. What criteria do you use?

I have just finished teaching through 1 Corinthians 14 for a home group in my church. Which verses in ch 14 would you like me to explain or comment on? I'm interested in what the Scriptures state and an accurate exegesis of the text. I'm not interested in subjective interpretation of tongues being 'gurgling and cooing like a baby'.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

no, i am promoting the view that Paul spoke in genuine tongues, not glossololia, even characterized as "xenoglossy" in Scripture--although i suspect that is symbolic--which concept today might best be reflected in the songs of David Byrne, or iow possibly speaking in plain English, to an English speaking audience, and yet no one can understand you because you are not saying anything that reinforces what everyone already believes, so there is a sense in which you cannot even be understood, like that possibly.

Where in 1 Cor 12-14 do we find Paul's speaking in tongues described as 'xenoglossy'? Or, is that your subjective interpretation?

 

[101G]

1 Corinthians 13:1 "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

 

[Sword]

in a private setting, an unknown tongue is between the one and God. 1 Corinthians 14:2 "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries". but in a public setting, 1 Corinthians 14:4 "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. 5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying". 1 Corinthians 14:26 "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. 27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret".

So why the question if you knew that its for his edifiaction? Why would he need an interpreter?

 

[Sword]

1 Corinthians 13:1 "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

tounges are great but if theres no charity there no edification. we dont even need to mention tounges to no there no blessing if we dont bless. But you are miscalling this scripture

 

[101G]

tounges are great but if theres no charity there no edification. we dont even need to mention tounges to no there no blessing if we dont bless. But you are miscalling this scripture

No, go back to chapter 12 to get the context of why speaking in tongues, other or unknown, A BETTER WAY. that's all

 

[Sword]

I know its for all I know its for our good and the churches edification and the idividuals aswell. and dying to self just like fasting they go hand in hand. Nothings imposible for us.

 

[101G]

Nothings imposible for us.

Matthew 19:26 "But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
Great, good read. continue on in the Lord