I am sorry that some people when shown something from the Bible respond by being rude, others who have no answers don't respond because the Holy Spirit tells them not to discuss the Bible with people who disagree with them and can back their position from the Bible, and those who are interested in discussing the issue get lost along the way. Funny, since these threads were killed the place is kind if quiet, so I don't think I'll bother reading anymore.

Given the nature of my entrance here, I suppose it's not surprising that when we got to talking about the Bible we got no-where fast. I maitain my original position, which is that the sites I frequent ( both Christian and programming ) get a lot more posts in an hour than this one gets in a day. If you feel a sense of community then that is great, but if you want to talk about being a witness, you need to also get out there and be one, not sit in a circle, the 5 or 6 people who post here, and talk amongst yourselves about how you should be doing something to spread the Word.

All that being by the by ( it's just my opinion, so why should you care ), the fact is that the threads on which I was posting contain a number of questions and observations direct from the Bible, centred probably on the fact that 1 Cor 12-14 directly states that in the church different people will use different gifts, and this should also be the case for tongues ( because they were all speaking in tongues at once ), although it also points out we all CAN speak in tongues, and in fact this is how we pray in the Spirit. I hope someone will read these verses, and realising the Jesus said God requires us to worship this way, and that no other definition is given in the Bible, goes on the recieve salvation as I did, after several years lost in the so-called Christian money machine of books and tapes, of emotional meetings that leave you needing another fix but have no real basis on scripture when you get down to it ( pushing people over, claiming revelation of peoples problems, etc. )

I guess some here will dismiss this on the basis that I 'have a demon' or 'have no love'. Both things were said of Jesus, and His followers. This does not make me right, but saying such things does not make me wrong either. Let God be true, though every man a liar. I'm sure everyone here has a Bible, I hope someone takes the time to read it in light of my comments and an open mind, to accept what it says instead of what they assume it says.

I personally didn't involve myself in the conversations after a while because they didn't seem constructive. It was more of a pissing contest from my vantage point.

That said, I'm still not sold on the idea that speaking in tongues is a requirement to being a Christian...forgive me if I've misunderstood your position on this, that's just what I've gathered.

So, if you're still interesting in discussing this, please let's do. As long as everyone in this thread treats everyone else with respect, I think it would be majorly beneficial to all involved.

If you're already done here, I understand that too and I wish you the best of luck and hope that your walk with the Lord grows each day.

-Krylar
------------------

[This message has been edited by Krylar (edited July 12, 2001).]

If it helps, here is a blow by blow examination of chapters 12 and 14 I wrote a while ago.

(1 Cor 12 NKJV) Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not
want you to be ignorant: {2} You know that you were Gentiles, carried
away to these dumb idols, however you were led.

In other words, you used to follow gods that don't speak, and I don't
want you to be uninformed on the nature of Spiritual Gifts. It's obvious that Paul makes this comment as a point of distinction - our God speaks. How ? By the spiritual gifts in the church, as Paul is about to discuss.

{3} Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit
of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord
except by the Holy Spirit.

So many people think this is an aside from Paul to say that
if someone calls Jesus Lord they are saved. No. It is in context
with the previous and coming statements. Any Christian who has
witnessed to a JW will have been told it is possible to curse God in
tongues. Paul in these three chapters is writing about proper use of
the voice gifts in the church, the proper attitude to have in using
them, and to stop the abuse of tongues. It is in this context that he
reminds us also that we cannot curse God when we speak 'by the
Spirit', i.e. when we speak in tongues. That someone cursing God in
English is not speaking by the Spirit does not need saying.

Similarly, if we cannot speak 'by the Spirit' ( tongues ), then we
don't have the Spirit and cannot truly call Jesus Lord.

{4} There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

Lots of gifts, but one Spirit that gives them all.

{5} There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord.
{6} And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God
who works all in all.

We do different things in the church, by the same Spirit.

{7} But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the
profit of all:

In contrast to these many gifts, there is one manifestation of the
Spirit which is given to all. That's why they could say the believers
in Acts 8 didn't have the Spirit, more on that later.

{8} for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to
another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, {9} to another
faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same
Spirit, {10} to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy,
to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of
tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

This is the list of gifts. Now if we receive one or the other, or
even a mixed bag, then some Christians don't have faith, and some
cannot pray to God for healing. Only the unwise, faithless ones have
knowledge, etc. Pretty silly, isn't it ?

{11} But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing
to each one individually as He wills. {12} For as the body is one and
has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many,
are one body, so also is Christ.

Paul is speaking directly about the operation of gifts in a meeting -
this is obvious in 1 Cor 14. He's not saying only some can be healed,
he's saying in any particular instance only some will need to be. So
to all the other gifts. The point here really is that tongues are no different, the point is that they should stop all speaking in tongues at once.

{13} For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body; whether
Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free; and have all been made to
drink into one Spirit. {14} For in fact the body is not one member but
many. {15} If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I am not
of the body," is it therefore not of the body? {16} And if the ear
should say, "Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body," is it
therefore not of the body? {17} If the whole body were an eye, where
would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the
smelling? {18} But now God has set the members, each one of them, in
the body just as He pleased. {19} And if they were all one member,
where would the body be? {20} But now indeed there are many members,
yet one body. {21} And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need
of you"; nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." {22}
No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are
necessary. {23} And those members of the body which we think to be
less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our
unpresentable parts have greater modesty, {24} but our presentable
parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater
honor to that part which lacks it, {25} that there should be no schism
in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one
another. {26} And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with
it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. {27}
Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. {28} And God
has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets,
third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps,
administrations, varieties of tongues.

This is not saying we all have a different role that no-one else can
fill. It is saying that in any one meeting if all parts of the body
seek to be the eye, the body is incomplete. He's leading up to
telling them to stop all speaking in tongues at once, and that is what
this is illustrating. We don't all speak in tongues in the same
meeting, in the same way we don't all preach or pray for a healing.

{29} Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all
workers of miracles? {30} Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak
with tongues? Do all interpret? {31} But earnestly desire the best
gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.

The inferred answer of these questions is no, but the question is not
'can all', but 'do all'. Paul answers the 'can all' question in 1 Cor
14:26. The difference is illustrated by asking 'can everyone here eat toast for breakfast' ( yes ) and 'does everyone eat toast for breakfast' ( no - I don't eat breakfast )

(1 Cor 14:26 NKJV) How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come
together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a
revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for
edification.

The NIV etc. add 'or' between the items in this verse, that is a
doctrinal translation, adding a word which is not in the Greek. Even if 'or' is added, it doesn't mean we have the same thing every time.

Chapter 13 is pretty clear, although I have pointed out from it previously that tongues do not cease until we see Jesus face to face, and that the point is tongues with love, not tongues OR love.

chapter 14

The prior two chapters of course talk about how there are a variety of
gifts used in the church, and that the use of the gifts needs to be
motivated by love to be of any value at all.

(1 Cor 14 NKJV) Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but
especially that you may prophesy.

There is no dichotomy between love and gifts, people who say that are
wrong. Paul says we need both, and tells us to seek to use the gift
of prophecy especially.

{2} For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God,
for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks
mysteries.

He starts to explain why - NO man understands tongues, we speak not to
each other at all, but to God.

{3} But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and
comfort to men.

On the other hand, when we prophecy we comfort those around us. This
is setting up the main context, that the previous two chapters and
this one are not about our day to day lives, but how a meeting is run.

{4} He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies
edifies the church.

Paul is not saying it is a bad thing for us to be edified, but in a
church meeting we need to serve each other, not only ourselves.

{5} I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you
prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with
tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive
edification.

In the context of a church meeting, Paul says he sees value in all
speaking in tongues, but prefers them to prophecy for the reason
stated.

{6} But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues, what
shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by
knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

Nothing, if he spoke in tongues only, there is no chance of anyone
ever understanding him.

{7} Even things without life, whether flute or harp, when they make a
sound, unless they make a distinction in the sounds, how will it be
known what is piped or played? {8} For if the trumpet makes an
uncertain sound, who will prepare himself for battle? {9} So likewise
you, unless you utter by the tongue words easy to understand, how will
it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air.

An example from nature - if you don't understand what you hear, how
can you act on it, or respond to it ?

{10} There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world,
and none of them is without significance. {11} Therefore, if I do not
know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to him who
speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me.

Another example - people may speak all sorts of languages, but they
are of no earthly use unless understood.

{12} Even so you, since you are zealous for spiritual gifts, let it be
for the edification of the church that you seek to excel.

As discussed in chapter 13.

{13} Therefore let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may
interpret.

Praying to interpret does not mean understanding the language, it
means interpreting by inspiration. We will not find a single verse
that indicates any other method, which makes sense, as in the natural,
'no man understands'.

{14} For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding
is unfruitful.

When I pray in tongues, I don't understand what I am saying. This is the only definition of prayer in the Spirit given in the Bible, an activity that keeps us in Gods love according to Jude 20-21.

{15} What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I
will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit,
and I will also sing with the understanding.

Paul makes two important distinctions here.

1/ Tongues are how we pray in the Spirit, and
2/ the only way, because it is distinct from praying words we
understand.

{16} Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will he who occupies
the place of the uninformed say "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since
he does not understand what you say? {17} For you indeed give thanks
well, but the other is not edified.

Because if we pray in the Spirit, no-one can say 'amen', they can only
listen without understanding. Again, it is clear no-one is ever going
to understand prayer in tongues.

{18} I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all; {19} yet
in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding,
that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

Anyone who has spoken in tongues will tell you that how much and often
we do so is under our control. You either can do it or you cannot,
and if you can, you choose when you do so. This letter proves that by
telling people in Corinth how to use the gift. It is obvious Paul
could not be thankful for his using the gift more than those in
Corinth - he was not there, and seems only to know they overused the
gift in their meetings. He is more thankful than all of them for the
gift of tongues, he values it highly, and is saying so before speaking
to regulate it's overuse in the Corinthian church meetings.

{20} Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice
be babes, but in understanding be mature. {21} In the law it is
written: "With men of other tongues and other lips I will speak to
this people; And yet, for all that, they will not hear Me," says the
Lord. {22} Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe
but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for
those who believe.

Be wise in how we do things, the Bible says tongues are a sign to
unbelievers, but they are not a sign to believers ? Why ? I'd suggest
it's because any believer by definition speaks in tongues.

{23} Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and
all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or
unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

Don't all speak in tongues at once.

{24} But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person
comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all. {25} And
thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on
his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you.

Although tongues are a sign to unbelievers, prophecy is also a sign to
them, and one they can understand.

{26} How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you
has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an
interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

You are all able to speak in tongues, interpret, and do all these
other things, but do them in a way that benefits the church.

{27} If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most
three, each in turn, and let one interpret. {28} But if there is no
interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to
himself and to God.

Unless you know someone is going to interpret the tongue, don't use it
in the church.

{29} Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. {30}
But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep
silent.

A point of order, if two people start to prophecy at once, the first
should keep silent. This is usually unclear, but Paul's instruction
makes for people wanting to stop and allow the other to go on.

{31} For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all
may be encouraged.

There is no shame in stopping, because we're not proving anything, it
is well known that all Christians are able to prophecy.

{32} And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

And we have control over use of the gift, so again, no excuse for not
stopping if necessary to make the meeting orderly. This flies in the face of some Pentecostal groups claiming essentiall possession by the Spirit and not being able to control their outlandish actions.

{33} For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all
the churches of the saints.

The reason we must use the gifts in the way described.

{34} Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not
permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also
says. {35} And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own
husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

A separate point of order, women are not to speak out in a meeting.
The reasons for women being nominated are cultural, but in effect,
no-one should speak out during a meeting, if they have a question they
should ask it later.

{36} Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you
only that it reached?

Paul asks if the Corinthians will accept instruction or if they think
they have monopoly on God's Word and right to alter it.

{37} If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him
acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments
of the Lord.

Obviously those in Corinth by abusing the gifts thought themselves
gifted, Paul says if you think that, then accept that what I say is
from God.

{38} But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.

This is pretty clear.....

{39} Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not
forbid to speak with tongues.

Finally, he tells them to seek to prophecy, as all can, and not to
forbid tongues. Why say it like that ? Every Christian needs to seek
to use prophecy if they want to, but they all, by definition, already
know they can speak in tongues from experience.

{40} Let all things be done decently and in order.

The point of it all.

No verse in there indicates anyone ever understanding tongues, and
many make clear that this is not possible or to be expected.

Christian

Two questions popup initially from my first read-over:

1) I note that there are people who can interpret tongues (1 Cor 12:8). In order to interpret, wouldn't that person need to understand what's been said?

2) If it's a requirement for a believer to speak in tongues--something that would count me out as a believer, as I never have spoken in tongues--then what does my acceptance that Christ is Savior mean? Does this mean that I have accepted Christ, but He has not accepted me? I understand what Paul is saying, but the inference is that I'm not a believer if I don't speak in tongues, yet Jesus says in John 5:25 (NIV) "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." I believe this to be true, and I believe that the Bible is His Word, yet since I don't speak in tongues am I still condemned?

Thank you again for taking the time to go through this, MMIO. I look forward to your response...and I will continue to study your current post.

God bless,

-Krylar

------------------

quote:

---

1) I note that there are people who can interpret tongues (1 Cor 12:8). In order to interpret, wouldn't that person need to understand what's been said?

---

No, because interpretation is by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. God fills the mouth of the person speakig in tongues with words they cannot understand, and fills the mouth of the person interpreting with words they did not understand when they were spoken in the tongue - it's really very similar.

quote:

---

2) If it's a requirement for a believer to speak in tongues--something that would count me out as a believer, as I never have spoken in tongues--then what does my acceptance that Christ is Savior mean? Does this mean that I have accepted Christ, but He has not accepted me? I understand what Paul is saying, but the inference is that I'm not a believer if I don't speak in tongues, yet Jesus says in John 5:25 (NIV) "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." I believe this to be true, and I believe that the Bible is His Word, yet since I don't speak in tongues am I still condemned?

---

Regarding the scripture you quote it falls under the category of verses that ellucidate on the promise, but not the path. Hearing His Word involves doing it, if that requires accepting Jesus or it requires Acts 2:38, we would agree it is less than specific on the way to enter in.

I would prefer to suggest that you are in the same situation as Cornelius - that your desire to serve God has resulted in His providing an opportunity to hear the full Gospel, so you can have a chance to enter in.

http://members.aol.com/twarren13/tongues.html

[This message has been edited by Revelator (edited July 14, 2001).]

While reading it, I went off on a tangent and remember some verses from Matthew 16:1-28 I believe that God can and does speak through men, as stated by YHSVH in 16:17 "Blessed are you, Simon Son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven." Did Peter know that God had revealed this to him? Probably not. I suppose that he would not have said anything except that YHSVH asked the question. (Interesting, as this was a method practiced by the Greeks to get to the truth of things; it was called dialogue.)

Well, getting back to the context of the story, the Pharasees were asking for a sign, but YHSVH replied that they were incapable of interpreting signs of their times except the sign of Jonah, who was trapped 3 days and night in the belly of big fish, then delivered. This foretold his death and resurrection.

Anyway, I do believe God the Father does speak through man whether man believes it or not. However, I wondered how I could recognize His voice when I see or hear it (whether from myself or others or whatever)? Well, I tend to believe that man recognizes that which he is looking and searching for...God...,and through Christ, the Son of living God.

I guess that man was incapable of believing or believing in YHSVH except that God the Father allows man to...

Sorry, I digress, and please continue...

St. Cheez

Anyhow, the people who wrote this article are clearly ignorant. That is, they speak based on their intellectual understanding of something they both have not experienced and choose instead to condemn. Does this mean Revelator thinks tongues are Satanic, or is he just playing Devil's Advocate ? I'd be interested to know, assuming you're allowed to say.

Anyhow, here is a sample:

quote:

---

"For, if I pray in my own foreign language while in public, my own spirit is indeed praying." Indeed, I myself right then certainly understand what I am praying at that time. "But my understanding is unwise" to pray thus, publically, in my own foreign language -- unless I translate [or get someone else to translate] my prayer. For my prayer would then need to be translated out of my own foreign language, and into the different language of the listeners (so as to benefit them too)!

---

Paul clearly differentiates between prayer in the Spirit and in the understanding. If someone is speaking in their OWN foreign language, how is this remotely speaking in tongues, as opposed to just talking in Greek because you're Greek.

Another:

quote:

---

What I Corinthians 14:14 really means
What does Paul really mean in I Cor. 14:14? We believe he means the following: 'If I pray in public in a language well-known to myself but foreign to most of my listeners, my mind is unfruitful. For then my mind has not grasped that my listeners, who do not understand that foreign language I just prayed in, are deriving no benefit from my recent untranslated prayer. My mind is "unfruitful" in that it did not -- while my spirit was praying -- proceed to translate my own foreign words into the Corinthian dialect, for the benefit of my listeners.'

Note that Paul does not say: 'If I pray in a tongue, even I do not understand it!' But, as the famous Scottish Presbyterian Bible Translator Rev. Prof. Dr. James Moffatt rightly renders the phrase, Paul here actually meant: "If I pray with a tongue, my spirit prays, no doubt; but my mind is no use to anyone" -- that is, to anyone else!

In such a situation, this kind of prayer -- unless translated --is of no use to anyone else then present. For no one else then present, is able to understand the language in which I just prayed. Because those listeners had never previously learned that language -- nor were those listeners then experiencing a miracle in their ears, enabling them suddenly to understand the language in which I just prayed.

---

Anyone who chooses to believe these interpretations is more interested in using the Bible to support their own view than finding out what the Bible says. These positions are simply untenable from the Bible, they fly directly in the face of what the verses actually say.

However, I did get the impression that some people were prejudiced toward people who speak in tongues. I personally do not have anything against this gift of the Holy Spirit. Its just the attached idea of salvation with which I have problems. I believe that this idea of salvation (speaking in tongues being the only sign of salvation)is taught by man and not God, and that this idea of salvation is a divisive force which could destroy to the Body of Christ, if accepted. Paul clearly states the Body of Christ is not one part, those who speak in tongues, to the exclusion of all other parts of the Body. You apparently ignore or deny this.

Really, the 3 chaps of Cor 1 are not difficult reading. It does not take a scholar to figureout what Paul is trying to say, even though he is trying to be diplomatic about it. I believe that most people probably understand to a degree what Paul was talking about. These commentators were apparently trying to explain the verses ad infinitum to Pentacostal people who apparently are fixed in their own belief system.

I think it is much easier to just say "go your own way". When Judgement Day comes you either are right or your are wrong. Bringing more people along will not strengthen your position. So, be brave and hope you are right.

St. Cheez

[This message has been edited by Saint Cheez (edited July 14, 2001).]

Can man make that decision of which gift he may receive? That decision is made by the Spirit. You can pray for a gift or gifts. There is no certainty that you will ever get that gift or gifts.

I suppose that you job would be to cause people to desire this gift. Why should they want it? Do people get some estatic feeling from it? They apparently do not gain any new revelations from it, because they do not know what they are saying? One lady I know believes that you able to enter the Holy of Holies by speaking in tongues. Is that the reason people should desire it? Or, is it the desire to "convert" people which is the desireable part?

I desire wisdom more than anything, but if there was another, I would like to heal people. I do love people, and I find it hard seeing people become sick or die. If there was anything else, I would desire that gift.

St. Cheez

quote:

---

As far as I know, Revelator did not say anything at all, but referred to this article.

---

AFAIK he is still under divine instruction not to speak to me, so I know he is just pointing out another view. This is why I asked if he shared it.

quote:

---

I found it interesting and kept it, because I find this phenomenon rather interesting. It even has a name, Pentecostal, where one gift is elevated above everything else, to the exclusion of all else. I suppose that this phenomenon has been happening for 2,000 years and probably will continue until the second coming of the Messiah. The interesting part is that the Pentecostal person seems to exhibit the same attitudes over the centuries even up to today. That is fascinating.

---

I'm pleased - a lot of people who oppose me contend the Gospel hasn't existed for the past 2,000 years, which is obviously not true, despite the latter rain.

quote:

---

However, I did get the impression that some people were prejudiced toward people who speak in tongues. I personally do not have anything against this gift of the Holy Spirit. Its just the attached idea of salvation with which I have problems. I believe that this idea of salvation (speaking in tongues being the only sign of salvation)is taught by man and not God, and that this idea of salvation is a divisive force which could destroy to the Body of Christ, if accepted. Paul clearly states the Body of Christ is not one part, those who speak in tongues, to the exclusion of all other parts of the Body. You apparently ignore or deny this.

---

I actually have pointed out several times why it is that your interpretation of these verses is in error, and plainly so unless you contend people can be saved without faith, wisdom or knowledge.

quote:

---

Really, the 3 chaps of Cor 1 are not difficult reading.

---

You wouldn't think so, would you ? And yet the people who wrote the article Revelator refered to are learned enough to use terms like eschatology, yet unable to interpret the verses to mean remotely what they say, believing they say the opposite to what is written on the page because they've already decided tongues are Satanic, in the same way you've already decided you're saved without this gift. Would it interest you to know when I was witnessed to I argued for six odd months because I specifically wanted salvation sans tongues ?

*snip*

quote:

---

I think it is much easier to just say "go your own way". When Judgement Day comes you either are right or your are wrong. Bringing more people along will not strengthen your position. So, be brave and hope you are right.

---

I know I am right, my confidence is strengthened both by my experience and the fact that no-one has yet been able to provide an alternative view that does not contradict the Bible.

quote:

---

Here is the weak spot in your appeal: Cor1 12:11 All these (gifts) are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them each man just as he determines (decides).
Can man make that decision of which gift he may receive? That decision is made by the Spirit. You can pray for a gift or gifts. There is no certainty that you will ever get that gift or gifts.

---

In context it's talking about use in a meeting. Like I've pointed out before 1 Cor 14 specifically states we can all speak in tongues, interpret and prophecy. Paul even tells us all to seek prophecy, yet you say there is no way of knowing if you'll get it. You said Paul is diplomatic, I agree. Not good diplomacy to encourage young Christians to ask God for something they may be blocked from having.

You're still talking about a list that includes faith.

quote:

---

I suppose that you job would be to cause people to desire this gift. Why should they want it? Do people get some estatic feeling from it?

---

They should want it because

a/ God offers it to them
b/ it is the sign of salvation, which we all need
c/ it is how we pray in the Spirit in 1 Cor 14, which is how we keep ourselves in Gods love in Jude 20-21.

Yes, I guess being built up by prayer in the Spirit could be described as an ecstatic feeling. Paul says as much in 1 Cor 14 when he says the person praying in the Spirit builds themself up.

quote:

---

They apparently do not gain any new revelations from it, because they do not know what they are saying?

---

When people recieve the Spirit they receive a revelation of God. It is a personal thing, and is always there, if they are praying in the Spirit or not.

quote:

---

One lady I know believes that you able to enter the Holy of Holies by speaking in tongues. Is that the reason people should desire it? Or, is it the desire to "convert" people which is the desireable part?

---

I'm not sure what you mean, but we enter in when we receive the Spirit, not when we pray in the Spirit. We have communion with Him by the Spirit, we're as close as we can be in this age.

quote:

---

I desire wisdom more than anything, but if there was another, I would like to heal people. I do love people, and I find it hard seeing people become sick or die. If there was anything else, I would desire that gift.

---

The gift of healing is from God to the person being healed, not the ability to heal people. James encourages us to pray for wisdom, I know I do ;0).

Are you preaching salvation through YHSVH? If not, then you are adding to the Bible by your own authority, not God.

Best wishes,

St. Cheez

quote:

---

This is salvation as I understand it: John 1:6-18
Are you preaching salvation through YHSVH? If not, then you are adding to the Bible by your own authority, not God.

---

1/ Once again you change the subject rather than address the points I raise.

2/ Of course I agree w/ John, do you disagree with the Bible verses I quote ? John is a broad overview, as you'd expect at the start of a letter. It is of no value in teling us who JEsus is, and therefore what we must believe regarding Him to be saved.

3/ What's with the YHSVH stuff ? I don't care what His name was in the original languages - that is immaterial. What matters is WHO He was, believing in His name is believing who He was, not what He was called.

quote:

---

John is a broad overview, as you'd expect at the start of a letter.

---

Whether its a long intro or not, does not make it any less valid today than it was back then.

quote:

---

It is of no value in teling us who JEsus is, and therefore what we must believe regarding Him to be saved.

---

It is responses like this which make you suspect and therefore your teachings suspect.

John 1:9-13 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He cam to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gve the right to become children of God--children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

This has no value to you? (incredulous) Well, I am not telling you to believe anything. This is what the bible states. Its the good news. It states those who "receive" YHSVH and believe in his name.

quote:

---

What's with the YHSVH stuff ? I don't care what His name was in the original languages - that is immaterial. What matters is WHO He was, believing in His name is believing who He was, not what He was called.

---

YHSVH is God's name. It is a sacred name which should not be spoken at the drop of hat or in vain. It means YHVH saves or God saves. Do you understand the implications of what you are saying? Don't you think its about time you start being more careful about these matters? Think MeanMan. The bible states "believing in His name". Why do you think they say "in His name" without stating his name. Obviously, you don't even know what his name means let alone why they do not speak it aloud.

You can not enter the Kingdom through the backdoor, not in a circle of people who speak in tongues. YHSVH is the gatekeeper. You can only enter the Kingdom or become a child of God through him. And, like it or not, you have to go through the baptism of water taught by John the Baptist, which means acknowledging that you are evil and a sinner. You can't get around these things. You can not get in through the back door.

You believe that you are saved through righteousness and speaking in tongues. This was never taught by YHSVH, never. He "is" the way. You keep saying that YHSVH "was" rather than "is". Think about these things which you are saying. Something is going on here, and you need to look at it, at yourself. Something is not right...

St. cheez

[This message has been edited by Saint Cheez (edited July 14, 2001).]

quote:

---

He starts to explain why - NO man understands tongues, we speak not to each other at all, but to God.

Praying to interpret does not mean understanding the language, it
means interpreting by inspiration. We will not find a single verse
that indicates any other method, which makes sense, as in the natural,
'no man understands'.

When I pray in tongues, I don't understand what I am saying. This is the only definition of prayer in the Spirit given in the Bible, an activity that keeps us in Gods love according to Jude 20-21

Because if we pray in the Spirit, no-one can say 'amen', they can only
listen without understanding. Again, it is clear no-one is ever going
to understand prayer in tongues.

No, because interpretation is by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. God fills the mouth of the person speakig in tongues with words they cannot understand, and fills the mouth of the person interpreting with words they did not understand when they were spoken in the tongue - it's really very similar.

---

This is really nifty logic. No one understands tongues not even the person interpreting. Thus, we can not test the spirit, because we do not know what the person is saying. We can not tell if its God, man or demon speaking. Obviously, you can never know for sure what spirit is speaking through you, because no man understands tongues, yet John 1 states test each spirit. Do you see any serious problem here?

St. Cheez

quote:

---

Of course I agree w/ John, do you disagree with the Bible verses I
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John is a broad overview, as you'd expect at the start of a letter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whether its a long intro or not, does not make it any less valid today than it was back then.

---

Of COURSE it's valid, it simply does not disagree with the more specific scriptures you try to make to no avail by quoting ones that are true, but too general to be core, fundamental scriptures on the topic of salvation. That is my point.

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is of no value in teling us who JEsus is, and therefore what we must believe regarding Him to be saved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is responses like this which make you suspect and therefore your teachings suspect.

John 1:9-13 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He cam to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gve the right to become children of God--children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

This has no value to you? (incredulous) Well, I am not telling you to believe anything. This is what the bible states. Its the good news. It states those who "receive" YHSVH and believe in his name.

---

Are we both speaking the same language here ? This is SO frustrating....

Of COURSE it has value, it simply does not tell me anything specific about Jesus, like what He did, what He said, what He stood for. It does not tell me who I am believing in, or what He desires me to do as a result. It is stirring stuff, but it does not tell me enough to be a specific scripture in relation to salvation.

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's with the YHSVH stuff ? I don't care what His name was in the original languages - that is immaterial. What matters is WHO He was, believing in His name is believing who He was, not what He was called.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YHSVH is God's name. It is a sacred name which should not be spoken at the drop of hat or in vain. It means YHVH saves or God saves. Do you understand the implications of what you are saying? Don't you think its about time you start being more careful about these matters? Think MeanMan. The bible states "believing in His name". Why do you think they say "in His name" without stating his name. Obviously, you don't even know what his name means let alone why they do not speak it aloud.

---

Ah, you're a Jehovah's Witness then ? Too bad that you misunderstand even these fundamentals. You think an unpronouncable set of constanants will save you ? You think a group of letters is the power of God ? I am reminded of Life of Brain - I don't think it should be blasphemy, just saying Jehovah.....

quote:

---

You can not enter the Kingdom through the backdoor, not in a circle of people who speak in tongues. YHSVH is the gatekeeper. You can only enter the Kingdom or become a child of God through him. And, like it or not, you have to go through the baptism of water taught by John the Baptist, which means acknowledging that you are evil and a sinner. You can't get around these things. You can not get in through the back door.

---

I'm not after the back door, I'm trying to show you the main gate. I'm not sure where this is coming from, except maybe my prior comments on repentance, which I stand by.

quote:

---

You believe that you are saved through righteousness and speaking in tongues.

---

No, I believe I am saved by faith, but faith in what the Bible says, not a group of constanants. That I know what Jesus did and said and place my faith in His keeping His promises has nothing to do with my rightouesness ( file under filthy rags ), nor is tongues my work, but His promise.

quote:

---

This was never taught by YHSVH, never. He "is" the way. You keep saying that YHSVH "was" rather than "is". Think about these things which you are saying. Something is going on here, and you need to look at it, at yourself. Something is not right...

---

Was ? I'm sorry if I made a typo that is the new basis for your judging my Gospel on things other than the scripture. Notice you've not quoted any again, or answered my comments from the Bible ( as usual ) ????

quote:

---

This is really nifty logic. No one understands tongues not even the person interpreting. Thus, we can not test the spirit, because we do not know what the person is saying. We can not tell if its God, man or demon speaking. Obviously, you can never know for sure what spirit is speaking through you, because no man understands tongues, yet John 1 states test each spirit. Do you see any serious problem here?

---

Not at all - the spirits are tested by the scripture. If I interpret a tongue and encourage you to keep yourself untouched by the world, or if I get up and prophecy that the local brothel has a $2.50 special that is ordained by God, are you saying you'd be unable to discern which of those messages came from God ?

Just to clarify you questions - yes, I believe that tongues refer to languages as the article pointed out.

The reason why I have not responded to your posts are because the Holy Spirit told me not to.

God does not speak to me with voices, but I know when he gives me impresses me to do something, or not to do something. In this case he didn't want me in the middle of the debate.

I know your mind is made up on this issue and that you cannot accept the alternative because then your whole Christian experience will be in jeopardy.

For:

1. If tongues are languages, then who inspires the sounds that come out of your mouth?

2. If tongues are languages, then it is not necesary to speak in tongues to be a Christian.

So at the moment there is no way you can possibly even think that someone else has the right interpretation.

Therefore I did not put that link there for your benefit, but for the others that read these posts. Let them look at the evidence and then follow where the Holy Spirit convicts.

But as for debating this issue online, the Spirit does not want me to do that.

The Article says everything that can be said about it anyway.
http://members.aol.com/twarren13/tongues.html

Kind Regards
Revelator!

quote:

---

Just to clarify you questions - yes, I believe that tongues refer to languages as the article pointed out.

---

Hi Revelator. I appreciate you breaking your silence to answer my question and make your position clear.

quote:

---

I know your mind is made up on this issue and that you cannot accept the alternative because then your whole Christian experience will be in jeopardy.

---

The interesting thing is I held the position I presume most here hold ( it's not been all that clear to me from thge discussions we've had ) for many years before hearing and obeying the Gospel.

quote:

---

1. If tongues are languages, then who inspires the sounds that come out of your mouth?

---

First of all I'd refer to the Bible as an authority, and as I said, the argument on this front on the page you posted is that Paul meant the opposite of what he wrote.

Secondly, I'd suggest that if I asked God for salvation and the devil gave me tongues, then we've all got bigger problems than our area of disagreement here. I am amazed that the position I am most defending here is that God is stronger than the devil.

To reiterate - I did not ask for tongues, I didn't even want the gift especially. I trusted in the sacrifice of Jesus to have made a way for me to be saved and I went before God willing to throw away everything I had done for a chance to follow Him. I spoke in tongues, and inwardly recieved a revelation of God's existance and love for me that changed me utterly as a person from that moment. I doubt the devil would have freed me from my drinking problem, for instance. I doubt he could have caused me in a moment to overcome a childhood that three years in therapy ( including drug treatment ) did nothing to change. I doubt he would have wanted to do these things if he could. I also note that following the 'trust in Jesus and you are saved' Gospel, sincerely and with my whole heart, did nothing for these problems either. I thank God I did not have the willpower to overcome in my own strength and believe it was God who did it prior to my conversion.

quote:

---

2. If tongues are languages, then it is not necesary to speak in tongues to be a Christian.

---

And if that were the case I could care less. I don't like the word 'necessary', it makes it sound like something we do instead of something GOd gives. IN any case, 1 Cor 13 says tongues will cease when we see Jesus face to face, Mark 16 lists tongues as a sign that follows believers. Even if we toss out the scriptures promising this gift explicitly as the manifestation of the Spirit, we stll need to see the gift in the church until He returns, be they human languages or a prayer language only God understands, for we speak 'not to men, but to God'.

quote:

---

So at the moment there is no way you can possibly even think that someone else has the right interpretation.

---

I actually try to look at every argument made from the Bible ( not that there has been much of that apart from your link ) objectively, but you're right in the sense that having had proof from God, it would take a compelling argument for me to make an idea of more import than that which God has done and is doing in my life.

quote:

---

Therefore I did not put that link there for your benefit, but for the others that read these posts. Let them look at the evidence and then follow where the Holy Spirit convicts.

But as for debating this issue online, the Spirit does not want me to do that.

The Article says everything that can be said about it anyway.

---

I have no problem with your putting up the link, or people reading it. As I said, it is fraught with contradictions, and so I woud fail to see how anyone who is reading the Bible as an authoirty without having made their mind up prior could possibly accept that tongues are from the devil.

But that's just me ;0)

http://www.abortionessay.com/files/Spirit.html

I tend to agree on certain point given: the burden of proof is pretty much on the side of person who teaches these doctrines, and its a deeply personal experience. In other words, final judgement lies between the speaker and God. What the speaker thinks of other person's relationship with God is clearly beyond their capabilites. That relationship is personal, between man and God.

And, I would be the last person to deny MeanMan's spiritual experiences. I have learned new things which I did not know before. Frankly, I am not against learning, but there some things I rather not learn.

One conclusion: If there really is such an experience as speaking in tongues, it proves that the Bible is true, and that such things really did happen. However, I suppose that these should strengthen a person's faith who has experienced it. I have not experienced it, so would have to take the person's word for it. Well, I have experienced other events which have helped my faith.

Best wishes,

St. Cheez

Best wishes,

St. Cheez

Very good article that.

I always did wonder about how Christian History viewed speaking in tongues, and it gave some good information.

I appreciated MMIO giving his testimony. From what you have shared, only God can do that kind work in your life.

Everyone views scripture from their personal experience with God - that is what I do.
When one finds something that contradicts their understanding, either they must change their understanding, or substatiate their beliefs from the Bible. (he he, I am using the third person and I didn't even realise it)

This is what I have done. The tongues question was different to my personal experience. But I have looked at the evidence and I can honestly say that the Bible teachers what the article said.

I know MMIO believes differently.
To me the most important thing is that we do what God has convicted us to do.

If I was convicted that speaking in tongues was necessary for salvation, and there was enough evidence to support it from the Bible (and I admit there is a little), then I would have to do something about that. But at the moment, the Holy Spirit has not convicted me, and from my study of the Bible, there is not enough Bible information to support this idea.

So, thanks for sharing that article St Cheez. I have bookmarked it for future reference. But if MMIO has found an article to support his position, please present that as well. At the very least it will help me better understand your position.

Well, must go back to work.

Revelator!

quote:

---

Everyone views scripture from their personal experience with God - that is what I do.

---

This is not meant as a personal attack, but everyone *should* view theri experiences in light of scripture because it is immutable and our perceptions are not.

I started thinking about this week or so. Well, I do believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in particular the Holy Spirit. I am reminded of these verses:

John 16:8-12 When he comes, he will prove the world wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because men do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father where you can see me no longer; and about judgement, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.

This is how I understood these verse: everything taught to man by man about sin, righteousness and judgment just is not so. Why did the sun not shine for 3 days when YHSVH was crucified? Everything that they believed was sin, righteous and judgment was condemned by the decisions man made. They preferred hate over love. We make these same decisions on a daily basis. As man judges so shall he be judge. Well, the Holy Spirit was suppose to remind us of all things concerning YHSVH. Yes, it all points back to YHSVH. I saw that just now also.

OK, I tend to believe that the Holy Spirit is now being accepted and recognized by the world at least in the last 200 years. I am particularly impressed that many are now worshipping the Holy Spirit. Is it now time for changes? How can new things be accepted if not scriptually based? Thats a tough question for me. Am I interpreting the signs of times well? I certainly do not wish to misunderstand the Holy Spirit. However, the Holy Spirit teaches and reminds me of all these things, which means to me that I should understand what I am being taught and reminded.

I am old school. For now, I have trouble with not being allow to understand what the other person is saying, nor being allowed to test other spirits. I will hold onto this and not let it go. Right now, I see some danger signs in some of these teachings, but I will keep them to myself. However, I will try to not close my mind to the Holy Spirit and will listen.

Best wishes,

St. Cheez

[This message has been edited by Saint Cheez (edited July 16, 2001).]

quote:

---

OK, I tend to believe that the Holy Spirit is now being accepted and recognized by the world at least in the last 200 years. I am particularly impressed that many are now worshipping the Holy Spirit.

---

If this is so, the Bible is wrong. Jesus asked of His return 'will I find faith on the earth', yet you seem to think the world is becoming more spiritual rather than less so.

quote:

---

I am old school. For now, I have trouble with not being allow to understand what the other person is saying, nor being allowed to test other spirits. I will hold onto this and not let it go. Right now, I see some danger signs in some of these teachings, but I will keep them to myself. However, I will try to not close my mind to the Holy Spirit and will listen.

---

It all comes down to trust - trust to let God fill your mouth and know He will not fill it with bad things, and trust to do things His way instead of rationalising them. The point of repentance is not holding on to any of our own ideas. I'm not sure what you mean about being allowed to test other spirits - if you follow God then all other spirits are by definition wrong if you believe God is right.

I guess it seems we have come to an impasse.

I actually do put my trust in the Holy Spirit. I know that man has lied in the past, even changed or added words to the Bible, etc. I knew that. So, how was I suppose to learn about the true church. Well, the Holy Spirit would teach and tell the truth, if a person is wants to hear and is willing to listen. I am. Day by day I put more and more dependence on the Holy Spirit rather than man or even myself.

As far as rationalising, God gave us a mind, so I suspect he meant us to use it. Can we rationalize everything probably not? But, its never wrong to search for God or want to know Him, even though I know the mind is limited. Hey, I work with what I got. Anyway, knowledge does not come from the mind. Everything originates from God.

I let go of my own ideas a long time ago. Before I had those spiritual experiences in the 80's, I was not able to understand these things at all. I did not understand the Bible or what YHSVH had said 2,000 years ago. Its a long story, MeanMan.

As far as testing spirits, I think that people at time do not really see the spiritual world around us. At times, I have seen it, and I can say that its abit frightening to behold. Anyway, thats a long story also. Let me put it this way. You probably assume that all your thoughts and feelings are really your own thoughts and feelings. MeanMan, is it not true that people who drink alcohol open themselves up to some rather evil spirits? Be honest now. Even if a person is not drunk or whatever, they are at risk, if they do not truly believe in the spiritual world around us. They are practically defenseless. I truly believe this, so I test every spirit and whatever comes to me including thoughts and feelings. Again, I do not identify. Thats what puts people at risk.

Anyway, MeanMan, we have been talking, so lets continue to talk. Maybe we understand each other to a degree or maybe we really don't. If the Holy Spirit decides that I should talk in tongues, then I will. If He decides not, then not. Even so, we are still forced to talk to each other in order to understand and know each other. I am not sure how to get around that. Try to get married to someone without talking.

Best wishes,

St. Cheez

[This message has been edited by Saint Cheez (edited July 17, 2001).]

quote:

---

Sometimes, they wear a cross with a dove over it.

---

You mean a graven image ?

quote:

---

Should I try to deny these things or try to stop it? I do not want to make the same mistakes made 2,000 years ago. Maybe these are now the time for acceptance and acknowledgement of the Holy Spirit, which was not possible 2,000 years ago. Well, time will tell.

---

The problem is that your basic assumption in this is that the Bible is wrong in what it predicted.

quote:

---

As far as rationalising, God gave us a mind, so I suspect he meant us to use it. Can we rationalize everything probably not? But, its never wrong to search for God or want to know Him, even though I know the mind is limited. Hey, I work with what I got. Anyway, knowledge does not come from the mind. Everything originates from God.

---

I'm all for thinking - I program for a living, after all. But the way to God is not through our thoughts or ideas.

quote:

---

As far as testing spirits, I think that people at time do not really see the spiritual world around us. At times, I have seen it, and I can say that its abit frightening to behind. Anyway, thats a long story also. Let me put it this way. You probably assume that all your thoughts and feelings are really your thoughts and feelings. MeanMan, is it not true that people who drink alcohol open themselves up to some rather evil spirits? Be honest now.

---

Only if they buy the cheap stuff. Alcohol loosens inhibitions, and so will cause people to behave in ways they normally would not. This comes from THEM, not from anything else influencing them apart from the alcohol. I do not drink BTW, nor do I believe any Christian should drink.

quote:

---

Even if a person is not drunk or whatever, they are at risk, if they do not truly believe in the spiritual world around us. I truly believe this, so I test every spirit and whatever comes to me. Again, I do not identify. Thats what put people at risk.

---

Anyone who drinks is on the way to being drunk, it is an incremental process.

quote:

---

Anyway, MeanMan, we have been talking, so lets continue to talk. Maybe we understand each other or maybe we really don't. If the Holy Spirit decides that I should talk in tongues, then I will. If He decides not, then not. Even so, we are still forced to talk in order to understand each other. I am not sure how to get around that.

---

The problem is that there is a gulf between our ideas and points of view. The problem always with the internet is that we can only seek to bridge it by expressing our thoughts and ideas, which are a poor way to communicate the power of God. But I'm happy to chat ;0)

- In theory this is the ideal.

Unfortunately our perceptions and the teachings of scripture go hand in hand.

We understand the scriptures through our perceptions. And then the scriptures help us modify our perceptions.

For Example

When you read tongues in 1 Corinthians, you read ecstatic utterances, because (and I am only supposing here) you are in a company of people who believe this and teach this, and you have experienced it.

When I read tongues, I understand "Human Languages", because I have had nothing to do with "Ecstatic Utterances" and I have heard true stories of people whom God miraculously gave the gift of "Language" to missionaries so that they could witness to foreigners. (I have heard the testimony from the people themselves)

Both of us read the same scriptures, but come to different conclusions.
Why?
It is because we read the scriptures through our own personal experiences.

I agree that is not the idea, but it is the way God has decided to reveal truth with us. Just as he let people write the books of the Bible from their perpective (and sometimes they got it wrong ie. how many demoniacs were there? Matt 8:28 says 2, Mark 5:2 says 1 - and the context of both stories show they are the identical stories)

That is why we must rely on the Holy Spirit to convict us on the right way to interprete scripture, because sometimes it is "impossible" to get the right understanding on some parts of scripture.

When we get to heaven, that is when we can ask God exactly what he meant, otherwise we just have to rely on faith and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Kind Regards

Revelator!

quote:

---

everyone *should* view theri experiences in light of scripture because it is immutable and our perceptions are not.
[\quote]
- In theory this is the ideal.

[quote]
Unfortunately our perceptions and the teachings of scripture go hand in hand.

We understand the scriptures through our perceptions. And then the scriptures help us modify our perceptions.

For Example

When you read tongues in 1 Corinthians, you read ecstatic utterances, because (and I am only supposing here) you are in a company of people who believe this and teach this, and you have experienced it.

When I read tongues, I understand "Human Languages", because I have had nothing to do with "Ecstatic Utterances" and I have heard true stories of people whom God miraculously gave the gift of "Language" to missionaries so that they could witness to foreigners. (I have heard the testimony from the people themselves)

Both of us read the same scriptures, but come to different conclusions.
Why?
It is because we read the scriptures through our own personal experiences.

---

You're saying people instantly spoke Hindu or something with no prior learning and thus were able to witness to people ? How did they know they did this if they did not understand Hindu ( as 1 Cor 14 requires for it to be tongues ) ? How did they follow up on and encourage these people as Paul did the churches in Ephesus, Phillipi, Corinth, etc. ? Where does the Bible support this as being the reason for tongues in any case ( i.e. where is the record of people preaching in tongues ) ?

I've met people who claim to have learned languages in no time and regard this as tongues. The two problems I have are:

1/ They understand the language, their experience is dictating what they accept from the Bible instead of vice versa.

2/ Memory is subjective. Everyone learns a new language quickly if they find themselves surrounded by it, and if they choose to regard this as a spiritual event it is only natural that the recollection of how fast it happened naturally increases with the telling, with no guile on the part of the teller.

quote:

---

I agree that is not the idea, but it is the way God has decided to reveal truth with us. Just as he let people write the books of the Bible from their perpective (and sometimes they got it wrong ie. how many demoniacs were there? Matt 8:28 says 2, Mark 5:2 says 1 - and the context of both stories show they are the identical stories)

That is why we must rely on the Holy Spirit to convict us on the right way to interprete scripture, because sometimes it is "impossible" to get the right understanding on some parts of scripture.

---

I disagree - I believe the Bible was inspired by God and anything that matters will be clear in the Bible, i.e. it will not contradict itself on matters relating to salvation or the desires of God for us and of us.

quote:

---

When we get to heaven, that is when we can ask God exactly what he meant, otherwise we just have to rely on faith and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

---

That is fair to a point, but I would suggest that it is still true that we cannot decide, for example, that demons are causing our code not to work if the Bible does not support this point of view. This is what I mean by saying our experiences should be subject to Scripture in the way we interpret them. If God says He tempts no man, then we can't claim He tempted us. You get the idea.

The person who told me was in South America and picked up a hitch-hiker and began talking to him. The hitch-hiker was receptive to the gospel and they had a good discussion and the hitch-hiker accepted Jesus.

At the end of the journey, the hitch-hiker said - "You speak very good spanish for an American". The man was so surprised. As far as he knew, he was speaking english with the hitch-hiker. But God had miraculously given him the gift of tongues and he spoke spanish.

This is the same that the Disciples did in Acts 2. They preached the gospel in all different languages even though they never had spoken other languages before.

a/ 1 Cor 14 says people who speak in tongues do not understand what they say, therefore your friend did not speak in tongues, and

b/ There is no instance in the Bible where the gift is used to preach the Gospel. Indeed in 1 Cor 14 we are told to make sure someone will interpret the tongue, and if the gift occured as you describe it, this would obviously always be the case. Also, if it was for the hearing of foreign people in the audience ( ignoring for a moment the question of how they got into the meeting if no-one spoke their language ), then it would not need to be interpreted, and would be odd, in the sense that a message for one or two people was presented to the entire assembly.

So while I won't go so far as to deny that the testimony you give is true ( how could I ? ), it was not speaking in tongues and saying it was is using our experiences to define what the Bible says, instead of vice versa.

What were the apostles doing in Acts 2?

As far as I can understand, they were speaking foreign languages by the power of the Holy Spirit and they were preaching the gospel with that gift.

There is no other way to understand that passage.

Yes, they certainly spoke languages that were understood by the hearers on this particular day. It does not say this was to preach the Gospel, although they spoke 'the glories of God'. Rather the preaching came in the local language when Peter got up. While these people were from all over the world, it is highly likely they were bilingual, and all understood Peter when he preached. There would have been no point in their gathering if they had no common language to speak. In fact the point where the Gospel is preached (men and brethren, what must we do ?) does not mention speaking in tongues at all.

As to why this one account does not gel with 1 Cor 14 (no man understands, he speaks to God), I can only speculate, but I believe the answer is also in 1 Cor 12-14. God wants the gift of tongues to operate in order, and as no-one was going to interpret on this occassion, God did it for them in a special way. This was the beginning of the church, and God did something special, which established that tongues are real languages, and that they glorify God. As I said, this is my opinion, I would not fight for it as strongly as I would for the fact that 1 Cor 14 defines tongues as languages that are not to men, but to God.

Though, I still do stick to my belief that tongues mentioned in the Bible are foreign languages.

Well, I suppose that's about all on this subject we can discuss.
Thanks for sharing your position, MMIO, it helps me understand you guys more.

Revelator!

This puts it best, so start reading from here:
http://members.aol.com/twarren13/tongues.html#HEAD9

That explains best to me 1 Cor 14:2

I guess it's up to you if you want to keep discussing this, but from my POV there are serious issues with the chapter and the interpretation you've directed me to, and I'm happy to explore them to see if your view is internally consistent with 1 Cor 12-14, or if I am right in thinking otherwise.