Tongues

[CharismaticLady]

I fully agree with your statement that you certainly cannot teach what you do not understand. Jesus gave the assignment at Mat 28:19,20, and of course once a disciple is made, then he is adequately qualified to teach and make disciples as well. Jehovah stated this for our time maam:
(Isaiah 2:2, 3) . . .In the final part of the days, The mountain of the house of Jehovah Will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, And it will be raised up above the hills, And to it all the nations will stream. 3 And many peoples will go and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, To the house of the God of Jacob. He will instruct us about his ways, And we will walk in his paths.”. . .
Likely you believe we are living in the last days, so this prophecy is being fulfilled today, as a matter of fact we are quite close to fulfilling our assignment reaching almost to the ends of the earth Acts 1:8; Mat 24:14

But as far as tongues originally being a teaching method, perhaps you haven't reviewed the account for a while:
(Acts 2:6-11) . . .a crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Indeed, they were utterly amazed and said: “See here, all these who are speaking are Gal·i·leʹans, are they not? 8 How is it, then, that each one of us is hearing his own native language? 9 Parʹthi·ans, Medes, and Eʹlam·ites, the inhabitants of Mes·o·po·taʹmi·a, Ju·deʹa and Cap·pa·doʹci·a, Ponʹtus and the province of Asia, 10 Phrygʹi·a and Pam·phylʹi·a, Egypt and the regions of Libʹy·a near Cy·reʹne, sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Creʹtans, and Arabians—we hear them speaking in our languages about the magnificent things of God.”

That was not for preaching. Peter gave a sermon after this sign. And they weren't speaking their languages; they all HEARD all of them in their own language.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I've looked up what Calvin said about "When that which is perfect is come". This is what he says:

"Paul might have put it this way: 'When we have reached the winning-post, then the things that helped us on the course will be finished with.' But he uses the same way of expressing himself as before, in setting perfection in contrast with what is in part. He is saying: 'When perfection comes it will abolish everything that gives aid to our imperfections.' But when will that perfection come? It begins, indeed, at death, because then we put off many weaknesses along with the body; but it will not be completely established until the day of judgment, as we shall soon learn. We conclude that it is stupid of people to make the whole of this discussion apply to the intervening time."

It was obvious to Calvin that the canon of Scripture was well and truly closed for the previous 14 centuries and yet he does not in any way refer to the "perfection" of Scripture to the verse. He reflect what the majority of good commentators state: that the cessation of the gifts occurs at death and that the present use of the gifts are to make up for our present imperfections which will finally be resolved at the day of judgment. So those Calvinists who are quoting the phrase to say that the "perfection of Scripture" is the reason for cessation of the gifts, are dreamers, using the phrase to give credence to their silly dreams.

It is interesting what Calvin says about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14. In fact, he is a bit enigmatic about it. He is definite that there is a gift of tongues, and that there is a private and public use of it, but the public use must include interpretation. He says that it is a sign to unbelievers in the sense that when they hear a foreign language it means a curse of judgment, in the same way as Isaiah says it. Then he says something very interesting: "If I pray in a language that is unknown to me, and the Spirit provides me with a rich flow of words, it is clear that the Spirit itself, which controls my tongue, will indeed be praying, but my understanding will not be involved with the prayer." This may very well mean that praying in tongues is not unknown or unusual to him. Perhaps he had prayed in tongues, or at least known of people around him who did pray in tongues. he says that in his day there are theologians who viciously pour out their opposition to it. He doesn't seem to identify with them, but takes a more moderate stance. He says that the gift of tongues was not given just for the Corinthians to show off, nor was tongues without purpose. He says it was given for the purpose of communication. And he goes on to say that communication in a foreign language at church is like speaking to the wall because no one understands what is being spoken. It is only useful in church when here is someone present who can interpret it into language which can be understood.

So, those Calvinists who are extremely opposed to tongues, definitely do not represent Calvin's personal view of the gift. I am still looking for his reason why the gift declined and ceased.

Interesting. The only thing I didn't agree with is perfection comes at death.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Calvin has an interesting comment about that. He says that when unbelievers hear the foreign languages of tongues, they are convicted of sin, righteousness and judgment to come, but to try and hide their sense of conviction, they accuse the believers of being mad. This goes right along with Festus, when he heard Paul preaching the gospel to him, which caused feelings of conviction, he masked his feelings by saying, "Much learning has made you mad!" Felix on the other hand "trembled" when Paul preached the Gospel to him, and he dealt with with his feelings of conviction by putting Paul off to another time. These two responses often come from unbelievers when they are confronted with the Gospel and are convicted of sin. They either rubbish the preacher, or procrastinate an advance toward a decision for Christ.

Do you interpret it that way? I don't.

 

[amadeus]

Sure, that's what the tongue deniers use all the time.
I have heard it often.

There's one problem:

What is "complete" has not come yet.

Yes I do have a 1300 Bonneville

Even if the Bible is complete, is not the understanding of it for me and for most others still incomplete. God is not finished with us yet!

The quickening, if it is working anywhere, is it not within you and me and anyone else yielding to the Holy Spirit?

Most? Perhaps some believe it is all already complete in them. Some certainly speak as if they believed it was!

 

[jaybird]

But should not the test and confirmation be by God rather than by men?

Hey wolfgang!
If a teaching or teacher can not be tested there is no way to know if it's true. This is how people like jim jones would mislead people, if anyone questioned him he would just tell them the Lord told me so, I have the spirit and you do not.
In most of Judaism teachers are taught to welcome all challenges, this keeps the teacher with sharp wits and makes the students better students.
What if when Jesus was teaching at the same time there was another teaching, saying and teaching the exact same thing, making the same claims, but in fact was not who he said he was. Jesus always backed up His claims and people that were there knew exactly who He was.

 

[amadeus]

Hey wolfgang!

My music is certainly not up to that!

If a teaching or teacher can not be tested there is no way to know if it's true. This is how people like him jones would mislead people, if anyone questioned him he would just tell them the Lord told me so, I have the spirit and you do not.
In most of Judaism teachers are taught to welcome all challenges, this keeps the teacher with sharp wits and makes the students better students.

Do we receive Truth only by being sharp witted, better students?


'No way to know if it's true' perhaps for a carnal man or for a men with the Spirit who is regularly quenching the Spirit in him.

But what of his sheep?

"To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers." John 10:3-5

Who among us are his sheep?

"So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep." John 21:15-17

"If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." Mark 4:23

What if when Jesus was teaching at the same time there was another teaching, saying and teaching the exact same thing, making the same claims, but in fact was not who he said he was. Jesus always backed up His claims and people that were there knew exactly who He was.

If Jesus is here, he is here in people... in you and in me and in someone else. Who among us is always speaking as led by the Spirit of God? That people disagree who seem to be believers indicates to me that sometimes some of us are not eating his flesh and drinking his blood as we ought and/or we are quenching His Spirit instead of yielding to it... too often.

The very existence of a multitude of varying beliefs and doctrines and denominations often based even on the same translations of the Bible to me is a reason to believe that... but what saith it?

"...Christ in you, the hope of glory:" Col. 1:27

"If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." Mark 4:23

 

[Truman]

A tongue of fire came out of nowhere and flew into my chest. A dam in my mouth broke, and my prayer language, or tongues, burst out. Since I'm not 2,000 years old, the gift of tongues is available today, as well as all other spiritual gifts. But don't take my word for it. Ask Him.
We are streams from the Fountain. - Kevin Prosch

 

[Paul Christensen]

Which is why Paul was chastising the Church at Corinth!
He didn't want, and the Church did/does not "need" everyone praying in tongues, UNLESS, there was someone there who could A) Interpret what was being said and, B) That which was being said "edified the Church!" Which is the greater gift!

1 Corinthians 14:1
Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but RATHER that ye may prophesy.
1 Corinthians 14:12
Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

You are correct when speaking of tongues and interpretation in church meetings, but you can't answer the question about where and when Paul spoke in tongues when he said, "I speak in tongues more than you all" because it is obvious that his tongues speaking was not during church meetings.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Are you sure it is "praying in tongues?"
Or would what you're describing be more like this:
1 John 2:27
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Your Scripture quotes are not about praying in tongues. Yes, I am sure that when I am praying in tongues I am praying directly to the Lord in the Spirit. The words that I speak to the Lord are guided by the Spirit, therefore, it is the Spirit who is praying through me. "For the one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people, but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries" (1 Corinthians 14:2). This verse speaks specifically for private prayer where God is the only listener.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Aye! Not only for the unbeliever is one convicted toward a decision for Christ!
But, said conviction applies TO a believer, inasmuch as spurning a believer TO He who sent Christ!
Which, was why Jesus was sent in the.....And you could almost say...In the 2nd place!
Matthew 23:37
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Jesus was not talking to believers in the verse you are quoting. He is talking to unconverted Jews who were rejecting Him.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Thanks Paul for asking. Keep in mind those that were added rapidly, such as the 3000 you mentioned, many were already Jehovah's people, they accepted Jesus was the Messiah, and accepted his new covenant, so there was a rapid number entering into the faith that were already of that language. Of course for those 120 when the holy spirit was poured out on them and they started speaking in tongues they were already speaking the same language, and that display had nothing with spreading the good news. That example verified that God’s favor had shifted from the Jewish system of worship to the newly established Christian congregation. (Heb. 2:2-4)

A bit later notice what was said: (Acts 2:5-11) . . .At that time devout Jews from every nation under heaven were staying in Jerusalem. 6 So when this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Indeed, they were utterly amazed and said: “See here, all these who are speaking are Gal·i·leʹans, are they not? 8 How is it, then, that each one of us is hearing his own native language? 9 Parʹthi·ans, Medes, and Eʹlam·ites, the inhabitants of Mes·o·po·taʹmi·a, Ju·deʹa and Cap·pa·doʹci·a, Ponʹtus and the province of Asia, 10 Phrygʹi·a and Pam·phylʹi·a, Egypt and the regions of Libʹy·a near Cy·reʹne, sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Creʹtans, and Arabians—we hear them speaking in our languages about the magnificent things of God.. . .
From that we can discern that speaking in tongues was instrumental in the formation of the new Christian congregation.

I hope that helps Paul, thank you for asking for more evidence sir.

I note that the crowd was made up of "devout Jews" who were still bonded into Judaism. Peter tells them that they were the ones who crucified Jesus, but God had made Him Lord and Christ. This is consistent with the Gospel being preached first to the "devout" Jews before the Holy Spirit fell on the household of Cornelius. That's when Peter realized that Gentiles can be converted to Christ in exactly the same way as Jews.

Just adding that to your helpful post.

 

[Paul Christensen]

I am sorry sir, I am unable to answer that question. We have never heard of a faith that votes for or against the holy spirit.

I said that as a type of metaphor about the way many churches treat the Holy Spirit. They either ignore Him completely in their programming of services, or they treat Him as some indeterminate mist that hovers over the meeting, but takes no real part in it. The AOG by voting out tongues, are effectively voting out the involvement of the Holy Spirit in their meetings. If a church rejects one Spiritual gift, they are rejecting the giver of the gift.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Interesting. The only thing I didn't agree with is perfection comes at death.

He does qualify it by saying that although our weaknesses end at death, full perfection is not consummated until judgment day. By the time judgment day arrives, the perfected and glorified bride of Christ will already be with the Lord.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Do you interpret it that way? I don't.

How do you interpret it other than unbelievers hearing the foreign languages spoken convicting them of sin, righteousness, and judgment to come? Paul seems to interpret Isaiah in relation to tongues, and Isaiah speaks of when Israelites hearing the stammering speech of the Assyrians, it signals judgment to come for Israel.

 

[NayborBear]

You are correct when speaking of tongues and interpretation in church meetings, but you can't answer the question about where and when Paul spoke in tongues when he said, "I speak in tongues more than you all" because it is obvious that his tongues speaking was not during church meetings.

Welp? Wouldn't it be such an amazing "gift" if one spoke in tongues which were "inaudible" to anyone near him, just to interpret it audibly, and in Greek (I think), or Hebrew, perhaps even Aramaic when edifying the Church or churches he was at, or visited?
Maybe a onlookers response might be: "It looks like Paul is talking to himself again!"
And this probably happened as much in the street, or whatever house he may be residing in at the time, as it was "in" any assembly of believers. In this particular case? At Corinth.
But, these "scenarios" are not really mentioned. Save Paul saying he spoke in tongues more then anyone in Corinth, anyway. But, I don't think he was trying to be boastful, to the attendees. Perhaps, abrasive in his chastising, as it also seemed fairly obvious there was an issue of too many people speaking in tongues, and no one interpreting.

 

[NayborBear]

Your Scripture quotes are not about praying in tongues. Yes, I am sure that when I am praying in tongues I am praying directly to the Lord in the Spirit. The words that I speak to the Lord are guided by the Spirit, therefore, it is the Spirit who is praying through me. "For the one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people, but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries" (1 Corinthians 14:2). This verse speaks specifically for private prayer where God is the only listener.

I get that! I really do! And, if this should be during a church service with someone interpreting? All the better! Perhaps, therein lies a problem, eh?
During church services the people are too used to being preached at from the pulpit, and not from the attendees?
Meaning, that perhaps the interpreter is inhibited, or prohibited from interpreting? I dunno!

 

[Paul Christensen]

Welp? Wouldn't it be such an amazing "gift" if one spoke in tongues which were "inaudible" to anyone near him, just to interpret it audibly, and in Greek (I think), or Hebrew, perhaps even Aramaic when edifying the Church or churches he was at, or visited?
Maybe a onlookers response might be: "It looks like Paul is talking to himself again!"
And this probably happened as much in the street, or whatever house he may be residing in at the time, as it was "in" any assembly of believers. In this particular case? At Corinth.
But, these "scenarios" are not really mentioned. Save Paul saying he spoke in tongues more then anyone in Corinth, anyway. But, I don't think he was trying to be boastful, to the attendees. Perhaps, abrasive in his chastising, as it also seemed fairly obvious there was an issue of too many people speaking in tongues, and no one interpreting.

Do you live in a church 24 hours a day? Is church the only place where you ever pray? Or is your Christianity only for Sundays at church? Paul certainly did not spend 24 hours a day at church meetings. When he said he spoke in tongues more than them all, he was referring to the many hours he spent away from church meetings. If your Christian faith is just for church, then I would say that you have a few issues to deal with. Most of the times I have been in the presence of God has been when I have been alone and not at a church meeting.

 

[Paul Christensen]

I get that! I really do! And, if this should be during a church service with someone interpreting? All the better! Perhaps, therein lies a problem, eh?
During church services the people are too used to being preached at from the pulpit, and not from the attendees?
Meaning, that perhaps the interpreter is inhibited, or prohibited from interpreting? I dunno!

But I don't pray in tongues during church services. I don't belong to a Pentecostal church where they do speak in tongues. I belong to a little Methodist/Presbyterian church with six elderly ladies and one gentleman. Tongues is totally unknown to them.

I do all my praying in tongues privately when I am alone with the Lord; and because He understands what I am saying, He doesn't need an interpreter. Neither do I, because I am not praying to myself but to the Lord.

So your comments are pretty well irrelevant to my use of tongues in prayer.

 

[quietthinker]

Tongues
Ears!

 

[teamventure]

Usually Cessationists are like blind men describing the elephant. One touches its tail and says "the elephant is like a rope", one touches its leg and says "the elephant is like a tree", etc.
These Cessationists fail to look at ALL references to tongues.
BTW, I am not really new - some glitch had me re-register - I was here as GRUNT HEMLOCK before.

Well, the ones claiming they have tounges but end up rolling on the floor are blind indeed.