• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Did the early Church speak in tongues?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dave Slayer
  • Start date Start date
D

Dave Slayer

Guest
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?
 
Dave,

Christ died for EVERYONE. That most will refuse to accept it does not alter the FACT.

The Early Church would have contained ANYONE that chose to follow in truth.

There are usually NOT MANY that would be a PART Of The Body that did NOT ALREADY understand the message of Christ. So IN THE CHURCH, the ONLY reason that 'tongues' would have been used would have been IF, for some reason, there were UNBELIEVERS attending. Then one would have a reason to speak to them in their OWN language as a 'sign' that God is real.

Read The Word. I do NOT recall a SINGLE instance where 'tongues' were USED in The Body, or Church.

The 'tongues' that are used today didn't even EXIST in most areas of the world. For the ONLY instance that we have in our possession concerning a misuse of tongues involved those in Corinth.

What does PAUL say concerning 'tongues' IN THE CHURCH? He says that he is in possession of the 'gift of tongues' MORE THAN THEM ALL, (indicating not just any individual, but the COLLECTIVE CHURCH IN CORINTH), but IN THE CHURCH, he had RATHER speak FIVE words with the understanding than 10,000 words in an UNKNOWN TONGUE. Now, if this is NOT a PERFECT indication of the TRUTH then I don't know what else to offer.

Blessings,

MEC
 
Oh, and BEFORE anyone returns with; Forbid not to speak in tongues. Don't even TRY IT. For He PLAINLY offers the RULES of how to DISCERN the TRUE tongues. And ANYTHING outside of this is NOT TRUE TONGUES.

So, he was STUCK in a postion that many find themselves today. While there is truth that some things exist and cannot be denied, oftentimes things that RESEMBLE these things are NOT TRUTH. So, if he had simply stated that 'there are no tongues', then he would have been in denial of the truth. But he DID offer us a description of HOW and WHY The Spirit would offer such utterance; a pure and UTTER indication that ANY 'tongues' that do NOT conform to these 'rules' are NOT TRUE TONGUES.

Let me offer these here so that there is understanding:

1 Corinthians 14:

26How 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.

27If 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.

28But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Those that practice 'tongues' will tell you that when the speak in such a manner without an interpreter that they ARE speaking to themselves and God. This is simply NOT TRUE. For what we have offered above is TO REMAIN SILENT. That means without an OUTTER UTTERANCE. Speaking in one's MIND. Read it yourself.

29Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

30If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.

31For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

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

Notice here that the word spirit is spelled with a SMALL s. That is NOT The Spirit.

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

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

Some would offer this OUT OF CONTEXT. This WHOLE chapter concerns PROPHECY AND TONGUES. So, the answer is CLEAR.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

Now, Paul PLAINLY appeals to the TRUTH. WHERE did they first even HEAR of the Gospel of Christ? It is NOT UP TO THEM to alter doctrine and that is what Paul is CLARIFYING HERE. That is WHY he wrote to them in the FIRST PLACE. So that those that truly had a desire to FOLLOW IN TRUTH would NOT BE IGNORANT.

37If 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.

38But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

39Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

40Let all things be done decently and in order.

Now, in another chapter he offers that we are to COVET the BEST 'gifts'. And tongues are the LEAST in importance, equal to interpretation.

Now, what do you THINK it means to COVET THE BEST 'gifts'? It means that IF we strive to exhibit the BEST 'gifts', then there will be so MUCH LESS emphasis on those that are LEAST important.

Blessings,

MEC
 
Imagican said:
Dave,

Christ died for EVERYONE. That most will refuse to accept it does not alter the FACT.

The Early Church would have contained ANYONE that chose to follow in truth.

There are usually NOT MANY that would be a PART Of The Body that did NOT ALREADY understand the message of Christ. So IN THE CHURCH, the ONLY reason that 'tongues' would have been used would have been IF, for some reason, there were UNBELIEVERS attending. Then one would have a reason to speak to them in their OWN language as a 'sign' that God is real.

Read The Word. I do NOT recall a SINGLE instance where 'tongues' were USED in The Body, or Church.

The 'tongues' that are used today didn't even EXIST in most areas of the world. For the ONLY instance that we have in our possession concerning a misuse of tongues involved those in Corinth.

What does PAUL say concerning 'tongues' IN THE CHURCH? He says that he is in possession of the 'gift of tongues' MORE THAN THEM ALL, (indicating not just any individual, but the COLLECTIVE CHURCH IN CORINTH), but IN THE CHURCH, he had RATHER speak FIVE words with the understanding than 10,000 words in an UNKNOWN TONGUE. Now, if this is NOT a PERFECT indication of the TRUTH then I don't know what else to offer.

Blessings,

MEC


Hi MEC,

We agree that tongues are languages.
A tongue can be a foreign language and not be understood.
A tongue can also be a common language and still not be understood.
ie something can be in English and I can still not understand it. This opens up a new realm of possibilities.

blessings
 
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?

Yes they did!

People who are filled witht he Spirit will do so, and they have always done so over the ages. It was not a common thing because the Holy Spirit was obviously quenched or hindered in the dark ages. We see it more now and that is the way it should be, because we are seeing people discovering the freedom that Christ came to give us in worship and in walking in the gifts He gives. In the past, these things were misunderstood and lost because there was this monstrous institution that the church had become, that oppressed and denied.

Now, the Church of Jesus Christ knows who she is--the Bride of Christ worldwide, and we are free to be filled with the Holy Spirit and walk in His gifts as the early Church did, and as God has designed it. I thank God for that.
 
Alabaster said:
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?

Yes they did!

People who are filled witht he Spirit will do so, and they have always done so over the ages. It was not a common thing because the Holy Spirit was obviously quenched or hindered in the dark ages. We see it more now and that is the way it should be, because we are seeing people discovering the freedom that Christ came to give us in worship and in walking in the gifts He gives. In the past, these things were misunderstood and lost because there was this monstrous institution that the church had become, that oppressed and denied.

Now, the Church of Jesus Christ knows who she is--the Bride of Christ worldwide, and we are free to be filled with the Holy Spirit and walk in His gifts as the early Church did, and as God has designed it. I thank God for that.

While the words that you have offered SOUND GOOD, they have NO BASIS in history or scripture.

You say that 'an institution' somehow STIFFLED the Spirit of Christ. That is utterly FALSE.

While 'an institution' may well have dominated 'religion' and instituted much that is contrary to truth, that does NOT alter the FACT that we were TOLD that there would ALWAYS remain a 'remnant' of them that ARE faithful IN TRUTH.

Now, history shows that 'tongues CEASED'. Whether you accept this or not, it is truth.

Perhaps the 'tongues' that we discuss are 'different tongues'. Perhaps you are promoting the 'gibberish' that some churches CALL 'tongues'.

If this is the case, then it's irrelevant whether they EVER existed. For they never existed scripturally or in truth.

Blessings,

MEC
 
Imagican said:
Alabaster said:
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?

Yes they did!

People who are filled witht he Spirit will do so, and they have always done so over the ages. It was not a common thing because the Holy Spirit was obviously quenched or hindered in the dark ages. We see it more now and that is the way it should be, because we are seeing people discovering the freedom that Christ came to give us in worship and in walking in the gifts He gives. In the past, these things were misunderstood and lost because there was this monstrous institution that the church had become, that oppressed and denied.

Now, the Church of Jesus Christ knows who she is--the Bride of Christ worldwide, and we are free to be filled with the Holy Spirit and walk in His gifts as the early Church did, and as God has designed it. I thank God for that.

While the words that you have offered SOUND GOOD, they have NO BASIS in history or scripture.

You say that 'an institution' somehow STIFFLED the Spirit of Christ. That is utterly FALSE.

While 'an institution' may well have dominated 'religion' and instituted much that is contrary to truth, that does NOT alter the FACT that we were TOLD that there would ALWAYS remain a 'remnant' of them that ARE faithful IN TRUTH.

Now, history shows that 'tongues CEASED'. Whether you accept this or not, it is truth.

Perhaps the 'tongues' that we discuss are 'different tongues'. Perhaps you are promoting the 'gibberish' that some churches CALL 'tongues'.

If this is the case, then it's irrelevant whether they EVER existed. For they never existed scripturally or in truth.

Blessings,

MEC

Tongues has never ceased. The Holy Spirit was hindered, but tongues has always been with the Church as He fills His precious people.

Now he is moving among His people and they are becoming free in Him--the way it used to be in the first churches. We are living in an exciting time.
 
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?

People read the Bible and decided to test what the John Mac Arthurs were asserting was the absolute truth? Or like me, they just woke up speaking in tongues spontaneously one night?

You go by what you heard "somewhere" instead.
 
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?
While I dont trust them for doctrine, I do like to run thru the teaching of the Early church 'fathers' to see what topics they were bickering about. I may run thru my stuff tonite and see what sort of references to tongues there may be in their works.
It would be pretty telling if nothing was present...or nothing like we see today.
 
radorth said:
Dave Slayer said:
Did the early Church speak in tongues? I have heard that up until about 100 years ago, no one was speaking in tongues. If that is true, why the all of a sudden explosion?

People read the Bible and decided to test what the John Mac Arthurs were asserting was the absolute truth? Or like me, they just woke up speaking in tongues spontaneously one night?

You go by what you heard "somewhere" instead.
Tongues is for a sign for those who believe not.
Can we assume that you believe not and needed tongues for a sign that night ?

Brothers, do not be children in your minds, but in malice be like infants, and in your minds be mature. In the Law it is written, "By other tongues and other lips I will speak to this people, and even so they will not hear Me, says the Lord."
So that tongues are not a sign to those who believe, but to those who do not believe. But prophesying is not to those who do not believe, but to those who believe.
(1Co 14:20-22)
 
Oh NO you didn't. See, I have YET to offer this in defense for it is always UTTERLY devestating to 'them that follow and practice such teaching'. Their ONLY defense is that the 'tongues' refered to in 1 Corinthians is DIFFERENT than the 'tongues' that they practice.

Then you open up a NEW can of worms............for them.

Look, there WILL be those that are MORE concerned with 'self edification' than truth and these will gravitate towards that which appeases the FLESH. There is NOTHING that WE can DO about this.

We can offer the truth, but as the old addage goes: You can lead a horse to water.........................

But NOW that YOU have 'opened this can of worms FOR THEM', I am totally curious as to where it will lead in THIS particular conversation.

For I have had MANY on this very subject and eventually it leads to something like this:

You know Mike: perhaps you would be BETTER served attending a DIFFERENT church. Or, 'how were you RAISED Mike? Well, that's IT, you WEREN'T raised to BELIEVE in this. Or even, 'well, the problem is that you obviously are NOT submissive TO The Spirit'. That's the one that amuses ME the most.

So, guys who insist that 'tongues' still exist and are going stronger than ever: how is it? Are you congregating in buildings FULL OF NON BELIEVERS? Are you yourselves NON BELIEVERS. For Paul PLAINLY offered that 'tongues are for a SIGN, not to THEM THAT BELIEVE, but to THEM THAT BELIEVE NOT. And he goes ON to say that one MUST admit that his words are the COMMANDMENTS of God. Then he states that IF they CHOOSE to remain IGNORANT, LET THEM.

Blessings,

MEC
 
Im going to put this in each of the tongues threads so no one misses it.

Another issue that I find VERY odd is that these in Matthew 7 who are told that Jesus NEVER knew them have some very peculiar aspects to them.
"Not everyone who keeps saying to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will get into the kingdom of heaven, but only the person who keeps doing the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, we prophesied in your name, drove out demons in your name, and performed many miracles in your name, didn't we?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you evildoers!'"
(Mat 7:21-23)
These seemingly believe that they WERE His, but for all their supposed miraculous acts they WERENT.
No claims are being made, but it is peculiar to see that the way that these folks DEFENDED themselves was by the their exhibiting the SIGN gifts, as tho that was some sort of evidence that they were Christs.
 
Oh NO, you didn't DO IT AGAIN.

Wow, now you're hitting WAY too close to HOME. While I admire your understanding, I can't help but think, 'this guy is crusin for a brusin', (he he he, just joking).

Yes indeed. Not only does Christ tell them to 'go away from Him', He states that, "I never even KNEW YOU''. Now THAT'S a pretty profound statement. People DOING things in the NAME Of Christ, but Christ NEVER EVEN KNEW THEM. Wow. Now HOW Is THIS possible. Them calling themselves 'Christians', but Christ NEVER EVEN KNEW THEM?

Obviously, (though MOST will deny the possibility even), these were following a DIFFERENT Christ.

For I could call a 'bird' Christ and worship IT as the Son of God or even GOD Himself but that does NOT MAKE 'the bird' EITHER in truth. Do you NOT realize that Satan is ABLE to DO this VERY thing? That when he manifests himself upon this planet IN THE FLESH that he WILL call himself Christ OR God Himself? If not, then you certainly aren't reading the SAME book that I am.

So, I commend the man that has such insight. While I recognize his folly in attempting to POINT IT OUT to them that will NOT believe nor follow in truth, I can't help but be impressed with SOMEONE actually exhibiting the UNDERSTANDING.

Blessings,

MEC
 
MEC - may I suggest that you are putting a wrong spin on this. It is not that they are worshipping another Christ, but that they believe what is necessary to 'worship' or follow Christ is to 'do' (out of compliance) what the real worshippers do naturally. It is the difference between the sheep and the goats.
 
mutzrein said:
MEC - may I suggest that you are putting a wrong spin on this. It is not that they are worshipping another Christ, but that they believe what is necessary to 'worship' or follow Christ is to 'do' (out of compliance) what the real worshippers do naturally. It is the difference between the sheep and the goats.
Either way Christs response is what is pretty frightening.
When a person has lived their christian life having what they believe to be genuine spiritual gifts, then to be told on that day that Christ NEVER knew them...well, that passage makes me VERY careful about being consumed with any of the sign gifts and more interested in the rest of my walk...ie being sure I keep in constant prayer to Him to the best of my ability and making sure I harmonize the WHOLE of His word so that I understand what it said overall so that I dont take one or two verses to any unscriptural extreme.

My guess is that these who He says He never knew werent as interested in a real relationship with Him as they were with all of the external things, like showing some sign gift to all of their fellow followers.
 
Back
Top