Speaking In Tongues

[BradtheImpaler]

Jimmy Swaggart claims that unless one 'speaks with tongues' he/she is not saved

You have to speak in tongues to be saved or you have to speak in tongues and pick up hookers in a limo? I'm not clear on this teaching :wink:

[quote:bab4b]You can't judge the Bible on what people do, how they conduct themselves. You can judge them, but the Bible should be judged on its own merit. I'm not aware of any Bible reference to this "being saved by tongues" doctrine. The thief on the cross didn't speak in tongues and he was saved (lUKE 23:39-43)

You missed the point and the joke - even with the little "winky" face as a clue.

Why? Because 'tongues' are THE sign that one is 'Spirit-filled' and, unless one 'has the Spirit' they are therefore lost

And "THE" sign is easily faked. The whole situation is retarded.

Tongues is not "THE" sign. It is one of many (Matthew 16:17-18).

To say that tongues is not for us today is just an excuse to reject the Holy Spirit's direction in your life. You want to be in control, so you reject the Holy Spirit's control.

[/quote:bab4b]

I didn't say it was "THE" sign, I was quoting someone else. And I didn't say it wasn't for us today or not - I'm not even convinced if it really happened back then. I said it's not a sign if it's easily faked and/or if it can't be verified as a language and interpreted. How is something like that a sign from God? A sign from God ought to be something that can't be manufactured in the natural.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Just ebcause SOME people say this about tongues doesnt mean we ALL think that. Are you going to say Jesus isn't real just ebcause ONE person says 'Jesus was a made up person for an example.'

No... LOOK IN THE BIBLE. it clearly says speaking in tongues. There are 2 versions, one for teh unbelievers, where one can speak in tongues and witness to those of differnt nationalities and they ehar you in their langueg. And the other, your SPIRIT MAn speaking to GOD. YOU don't know what he is saying, but God does. If you do it in church, pray for an interpreter.

And how do you know if such an interpretation is valid, since no one knows what the person was saying except the one who claims to have an interpretation? How do you judge the interpretation?

It's circular nonsense.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Unfortunately, there ARE a few high-profile 'tongue-speaking charismatic charlatans' who don't help the situation any. Jimmy Swaggart claims that unless one 'speaks with tongues' he/she is not saved. Why? Because 'tongues' are THE sign that one is 'Spirit-filled' and, unless one 'has the Spirit' they are therefore lost. It's little wonder then that the gullible will take up this practice post-haste! This is one of the reasons I get so uptight with some on this forum when they incessantly refer to themselves as being 'Spirit-filled' ...whether they claim to 'speak in tongues' or not. An implication of your "spirit of the desire to believe in the supernatural" seems to be coming through.

SputnikBoy
This portion of your post is interesting in that it is similar to what I think about the Seventh-Day Adventist doctrine of Sabbath keeping. Let me show you what I mean by using your sentences with a few minor changes.

Unfortunately, there ARE a few high-profile 'sabbath pushing non-charismatic charlatans' who don't help the situation any. Joe Crews claims that unless one 'keeps the sabbath day' he/she is not saved. Why? Because the 'sabbath day' is THE sign that one is 'born-again' and, unless one 'has the Sabbath born-again spirit' they are therefore lost. It's little wonder then that the gullible will take up this practice post-haste! This is one of the reasons I get so uptight with some on this forum when they incessantly refer to themselves as being 'sabbath-keepers' ...whether they claim to 'be born-again' or not. An implication of your "keeping all of the commandments inorder to believe in the supernatural" seems to be coming through.

Read the Bible when you get the opportunity and study the Holy Spirit and His work. It may shed more light on what the Spirit-filled life is all about.
Thanks,
Solo

Good point, Solo. Hmmm ...Joe Crews, eh? I haven't heard anything from that guy in years. He was always an extremist in regard to diet, modesty, adornments, etc. A real legalist if ever you saw one. I'm exaggerating here (perhaps not) but Mr Crews' ideal dress for a female going for a swim would have been a large bag over the head, two holes cut out for the eyes (MAYBE!), and the open end tied securely at the ankles. Oh, but that would expose the feet ...darn!

As an SDA affiliate, people such as Joe Crews annoy me and I feel a great temptation to put a gag around his mouth whenever he opens it. The good thing is that the overwhelming majority of SDAs I've met are not like Mr Crews and probably wouldn't approve of him either. He isn't the kind of a guy one takes too seriously. But anyway, your point was made, Solo, in his particular case.

With Swaggart and others, however, their message of 'tongues'=salvation has been catching on big-time within Pentecostal circles. They ARE taken seriously. The present-day 'speaking in tongues' needs to be justified in some way. I mean, let's face it, 'tongues' in and of themselves don't do a whole lot for the individual. 'Tongues'=Spirit-filled=SALVATION, however, gives one a reason for flaunting this practice.

Human beings are strange and complicated pieces of machinery. They will do almost anything to be accepted by their peers, to belong to the group, to be a recognized member of society. Dale Carnegie once said, "The sweetest sound to a person is the sound of their own name." It gives one status, even momentarily. Similarly with 'tongues', especially once it becomes 'salvation related'.

Scenario: A number of people in my church 'speak in tongues'. Then my close friends take up this practice. More and more people are showing evidence of an 'in-filling of the Holy Spirit'. But I'm not. What is wrong with me? Am I lost?

The next thing you know, a person in that frame of mind WILL soon begin to 'speak in tongues'. And, it will have NOTHING to do with the Holy Spirit.

I have a friend who used to belong to one of the local charismatic churches. He and his wife learned to 'speak in tongues' - not because they believed in it but because they found it quite easy to do once coached by another 'tongue-speaker'. Both can still demonstrate this ability if they feel the need to make a point against it. Yet both could go into a Pentecostal church and participate as if a Pentecostal-native. No one would question their authenticity.

Incidentally, there is another forum member who knows the people I'm talking about.

Aside from the topic for a moment.
About the Sabbath, Solo. I know what the official SDA position is on that issue (in regard to its being a salvation one) and I don't feel capable of promoting that doctrine to others personally. And I don't do so. At the same time, however, I DO wonder whether or not the Sabbath MIGHT have some relevance in last-day events. Historically and prophetically one CAN make an '8-point case' for its relevance to future events. I remain cautious (even a tad skeptical) on these issues since it can get one into trouble if one isn't careful. IS the Sabbath an important issue, one that will figure in biblical prophesy? Is obedience to God an all important point? It MIGHT be and that's about as far as I'll allow myself to go on that issue. I really don't know. I DO know, however, that 'tongues', have absolutely nothing to do with one's salvation.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Just ebcause SOME people say this about tongues doesnt mean we ALL think that. Are you going to say Jesus isn't real just ebcause ONE person says 'Jesus was a made up person for an example.'

No... LOOK IN THE BIBLE. it clearly says speaking in tongues. There are 2 versions, one for teh unbelievers, where one can speak in tongues and witness to those of differnt nationalities and they ehar you in their langueg. And the other, your SPIRIT MAn speaking to GOD. YOU don't know what he is saying, but God does. If you do it in church, pray for an interpreter.

Hi Julian

Julian, we can't really continue this discussion until we define what 'tongues' are ...or were. There need be no confusion here, no surreal experiences on the part of one who might practice this phenomena. Actually, it's the 'surreal' part of the experience that points to the practice being psychological in nature. Tongues were not given to make people feel good or ecstatic. They were given so that the tongue-speaker (speaking the language of another) could allow others to benefit from the message. Why is this so difficult to understand?

Check your Bible Concordance if you have one. If it contains a Greek Lexicon check every instance where the word 'tongue' or 'tongues' is used to imply an utterance. You'll find the word 'glossa' every time. That simply means 'a worldly language'. It also means there is no such thing as a "Spirit-man' speaking to God through another person in a strange utterance. That is simply not scriptural. Whenever the term 'unknown' or 'mystery' is used in this context it simply means that the hearer doesn't understand the language being spoken. Why? Because it isn't their native language. Ever heard Swahili? If ever you do you'll no doubt have a puzzled look on your face. (It would be just my luck, Julian, to learn that you speak Swahili fluently!) :

The book of 1 Corinthians has to be one of the most misunderstood and misinterpreted books in the entire Bible. If not for a FEW passages in that book NO ONE today would be practicing some of the strange things some do practice in their churches. Christians really DO need to sharpen themselves up and steer clear of the unscriptural nonsense that is being promoted. Church is church. If one wants a circus they should wait until it comes to town.

 

[Solo]

Nice post SputnikBoy,
You did not act angry at any point. I am very impressed. Thank you for the great information. Joe Crews has been dead around 9 years or so. He came to visit me at my apartment 22 years ago with the local SDA preacher. I had just been born again within a few weeks of his visit, and I had attended his 30 day crusade in Siloam Springs, AR as I was hungry for the truth of God's Word. He asked me whether I wanted to become a member of the local SDA church now that I had heard the truth at his crusade. During the meeting the Holy Spirit brought forth scripture, book, chapter, and verse where it reproved his stand, and there was not a thing that they could speak against my position in Christ Jesus. I even liked Joe Crews and the preacher, but I did not agree with their doctrine, even after just becoming born again.

There are many today who "speak in tongues" and have no idea what they are saying, nor is it interpreted. That is not Biblical from my reading. It is difficult to explain to someone who has been told that without it they will not enter into heaven. The Bible doesn't say that, but some are taught that. Paul said that one should covet the gift of Prophesy over tongues, but that would be pretty easy to uncover if one was falsely prophesying.

Anyway, I enjoyed reading your post. Have a great day.
Solo

 

[SputnikBoy]

Thanks, Solo ...y'know, I'm beginning to like you! :wink:

 

[Imagican]

Scenario: A number of people in my church 'speak in tongues'. Then my close friends take up this practice. More and more people are showing evidence of an 'in-filling of the Holy Spirit'. But I'm not. What is wrong with me? Am I lost?

The next thing you know, a person in that frame of mind WILL soon begin to 'speak in tongues'. And, it will have NOTHING to do with the Holy Spirit.

BINGO!!

 

[SputnikBoy]

What's going on here? Soon I'll be friends with all of you guys and I won't have the heart to argue with ANY of you any more ...darn! :smt088

 

[Vic C.]

What's going on here? Soon I'll be friends with all of you guys and I won't have the heart to argue with ANY of you any more ...darn! :smt088

There is NO crying in a Christian Forum! :o :-D

 

[Solo]

What's going on here? Soon I'll be friends with all of you guys and I won't have the heart to argue with ANY of you any more ...darn! :smt088

Man, you would think that we are Christians or something!! :angel:

 

[kwag_myers]

Scenario: A number of people in my church 'speak in tongues'. Then my close friends take up this practice. More and more people are showing evidence of an 'in-filling of the Holy Spirit'. But I'm not. What is wrong with me? Am I lost?

The next thing you know, a person in that frame of mind WILL soon begin to 'speak in tongues'. And, it will have NOTHING to do with the Holy Spirit.

BINGO!!

So when the Holy Spirit is poured out (Acts 2:4), you'll all reject it? Just because of some counterfeits? Let's through the baby out with the bath water, is that it?

As to your scenario, why don't you stick to what is real? And since speaking in tongues is not the only sign of those who follow Jesus, your "Am I lost?" statement is unfounded.

 

[guibox]

So when the Holy Spirit is poured out (Acts 2:4), you'll all reject it? Just because of some counterfeits? Let's through the baby out with the bath water, is that it?

You're assuming that the gift of tongues that will be poured out by the Spirit means 'senseless babbling'. That is not the gift of tongues. The pouring out of the gift of tongues will be when a preacher stands up and preaches a sermon in English to a congregation of French people but they hear the French being spoken (I know of a preacher who this happened to in a Spanish church! He said the interpreter just looked at him through his cubicle window and took his headphones off. A little old lady came up and told him that he spoke the most beautiful Spanish. He spoke nothing but English all the way through!)

As to your scenario, why don't you stick to what is real? And since speaking in tongues is not the only sign of those who follow Jesus, your "Am I lost?" statement is unfounded.

The point being made is that this emphasis on the gifts of tongues by many charismatic churches cause people to doubt why the Spirit is not being poured out on them. Some churches say that we aren't truly saved unless we 'receive the Spirit'. So if someone can't babble like a fool, they could easily feel that they are not truly saved or receiving God's grace.

This is deception and one of Satan's great tools to decieve the followers of God.

 

[Imagican]

Kwag,

I feel for you brother.

I don't know 'if' there is a modern use for tongues. What I have personally experienced I have my doubts as to their authenticity. That is 'not' to say that tongues 'can't' exist. I just don't know what possible purpose they could serve in this era.

I 'do' know that the 'self-edifying' tongues that Paul speaks of are obviously 'not' the tongues referred to as: as the Spirit gives them utterance. spirit maybe, but NOT Spirit. The Spirit would not allow self-edification to be a part of a 'true' worship service. Self edification is a personal thing meant to be kept that way, personally.

 

[Julian Pyke]

Spirit refers to the Holy Spirit, part of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Little s, spirit, is your spirit man. We all have a spirit, thats what enters heaven.

Now why doesnt anyone respond (except one) to what I posted earlier? It's plain and clear. Here, lemme give you a debate paragraph I formed up in debate.

Upon study in Acts and Corinthians, one shall learn the act of speaking in tongues. First, tongue in the Bible often refers to as language. Contrary to popular belief, two definitions seem to appropriate these speaking in tongues. In Acts Chapter 2, on the day of Pentecost, the apostles came together, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Men from different nationalities heard these apostles and the multitude gathered. They marveled as they heard these Apostles speaking in their language, yet this multitude all came from a different nation, language. As just proven, the first definition of speaking in tongues: To speak to different nationalities of different language and yet all hear their own language. In Corinthians, it preaches on how the church of Corinth abused speaking in tongues. It speaks of self-edification but not edifying the church. This speaking in tongues clearly proves one’s spirit man speaking to God. A language one cannot understand, only God can.
The controversy in speaking in tongues holds many arguments. However, the second definition seems most controversial. Today, if one heard the Corinth version of speaking in tongues, (one’s spirit man speaking to God,) one might describe it as babble. 1 Corinthians 14:2 - For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. As just proven, he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God. Many become confused at this point. One must discern the two types of tongues talked about in the Bible. This scripture also says, for no man understandeth him, in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. One must also know spirit refers to the Christian’s spirit being, where Jesus lives inside of you. The spirit man stands perfect and holy before God. Further in Corinthians, to make this clearer, 1 Corinthians 14:14 - For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. The spirit prayeth, yet again, the ‘understand is unfruitful.’ Researching further into this chapter, one learns that Paul writes to the church of Corinth about their mistreatment of the Holy Spirit. He says that praying in tongues in the church accompanies interpretation. 1 Corinthians 14:5 - I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. Another, 1 Corinthians 14:4 - He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. The church of Corinth used this gift to edify themselves, they did not interpret to edify the church. To receive edification, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 14:13 - Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 1 Corinthians 14:27 - If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. Paul states speaking in tongues, let it be done by two, let one interpret, and pray for interpretation.

 

[kwag_myers]

So when the Holy Spirit is poured out (Acts 2:4), you'll all reject it? Just because of some counterfeits? Let's through the baby out with the bath water, is that it?

You're assuming that the gift of tongues that will be poured out by the Spirit means 'senseless babbling'. That is not the gift of tongues. The pouring out of the gift of tongues will be when a preacher stands up and preaches a sermon in English to a congregation of French people but they hear the French being spoken (I know of a preacher who this happened to in a Spanish church! He said the interpreter just looked at him through his cubicle window and took his headphones off. A little old lady came up and told him that he spoke the most beautiful Spanish. He spoke nothing but English all the way through!)

Wrong! When the Holy Spirit fell in Acts 2, the Christians spoke in languages that they themselves did not know or understand. What is it you are always saying about context?

As for my alleged assumption, you are also wrong. My opinion is based on the Word, and on my own experience. I too, know of someone who prayed in tongues and a Japanese person understood everything. In this case, my friend was not preaching, but praying. Yet, because this person was submitted to the Holy Spirit, i.e., the Holy Spirit gave utterance, they were used to reach the heart of another.

As to your scenario, why don't you stick to what is real? And since speaking in tongues is not the only sign of those who follow Jesus, your "Am I lost?" statement is unfounded.

The point being made is that this emphasis on the gifts of tongues by many charismatic churches cause people to doubt why the Spirit is not being poured out on them. Some churches say that we aren't truly saved unless we 'receive the Spirit'. So if someone can't babble like a fool, they could easily feel that they are not truly saved or receiving God's grace.

This is deception and one of Satan's great tools to deceive the followers of God.

That sounds like legalism to me. The problem is not discerning tongues from babbling, but understanding what the Word says about receiving God's grace. If someone is deceived, it is because they are ignorant of God's Word and because someone else has taught them an incorrect doctrine (for which they will be judged accordingly - Matthew 5:19; Mark 7:7-13). This is the case in the stated scenario.

I don't know 'if' there is a modern use for tongues. What I have personally experienced I have my doubts as to their authenticity. That is 'not' to say that tongues 'can't' exist. I just don't know what possible purpose they could serve in this era.

Again, I think that you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. In my own experience, tongues is invaluable. As to its "possible purpose",

Romans 8:26, "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

The phrase "...which cannot be uttered." can also be translated "which cannot be spoken in words". So, the Holy Spirit intercedes for us in a far superior way than we ourselves are capable of.

 

[Julian Pyke]

Spirit refers to the Holy Spirit, part of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Little s, spirit, is your spirit man. We all have a spirit, thats what enters heaven.

Now why doesnt anyone respond (except one) to what I posted earlier? It's plain and clear. Here, lemme give you a debate paragraph I formed up in debate.

Upon study in Acts and Corinthians, one shall learn the act of speaking in tongues. First, tongue in the Bible often refers to as language. Contrary to popular belief, two definitions seem to appropriate these speaking in tongues. In Acts Chapter 2, on the day of Pentecost, the apostles came together, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Men from different nationalities heard these apostles and the multitude gathered. They marveled as they heard these Apostles speaking in their language, yet this multitude all came from a different nation, language. As just proven, the first definition of speaking in tongues: To speak to different nationalities of different language and yet all hear their own language. In Corinthians, it preaches on how the church of Corinth abused speaking in tongues. It speaks of self-edification but not edifying the church. This speaking in tongues clearly proves one’s spirit man speaking to God. A language one cannot understand, only God can.
The controversy in speaking in tongues holds many arguments. However, the second definition seems most controversial. Today, if one heard the Corinth version of speaking in tongues, (one’s spirit man speaking to God,) one might describe it as babble. 1 Corinthians 14:2 - For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. As just proven, he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God. Many become confused at this point. One must discern the two types of tongues talked about in the Bible. This scripture also says, for no man understandeth him, in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. One must also know spirit refers to the Christian’s spirit being, where Jesus lives inside of you. The spirit man stands perfect and holy before God. Further in Corinthians, to make this clearer, 1 Corinthians 14:14 - For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. The spirit prayeth, yet again, the ‘understand is unfruitful.’ Researching further into this chapter, one learns that Paul writes to the church of Corinth about their mistreatment of the Holy Spirit. He says that praying in tongues in the church accompanies interpretation. 1 Corinthians 14:5 - I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. Another, 1 Corinthians 14:4 - He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. The church of Corinth used this gift to edify themselves, they did not interpret to edify the church. To receive edification, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 14:13 - Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 1 Corinthians 14:27 - If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. Paul states speaking in tongues, let it be done by two, let one interpret, and pray for interpretation.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Again, I think that you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. In my own experience, tongues is invaluable.

Same old story, kwag. You're applying some mystical 'value' to a practice that couldn't be of LESS practical or spiritual value. The 'tongues' you're referring to are no more than learned behavior or/and some psychological phenomenon resulting from ecstatic emotionalism. I'll even bet that you can 'speak in your tongues' at any time, any place, without any prompting from the Holy Spirit! All you need do is to work yourself up appropriately. You're evidently already susceptible to acquiring this state of the mind so you should be able to achieve it most any time. I'm sorry, kwag, it's not my intent to belittle you or to question your Christianity but this practice is so unscriptural.

Unfortunately, those who practice voodoo achieve a similar form of 'tongue-speaking' during their ritualistic practices. This is FAR REMOVED from the scriptural use of 'tongues' which was simply a scriptural term for 'languages'. If we were to drop the term 'tongues' and instead substitute 'languages' in its place, then GONE would be the mysticism of the term which the Pentecostals depend so much on. The very word 'tongues' has a supernatural ring to it. You can almost hear 'Twilight Zone' music accompanying it. Not so, it just means 'languages' (Greek 'glossa').

What IS of most value, however, is speaking to God in a language (your own) that both you AND God can understand. Now THAT is invaluable!

As to its "possible purpose",

Romans 8:26, "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

And this scripture is suppose to apply to present-day 'tongues' ...? I don't think so!

The phrase "...which cannot be uttered." can also be translated "which cannot be spoken in words". So, the Holy Spirit intercedes for us in a far superior way than we ourselves are capable of.

Perhaps so. But NOT through your lips. You also need to realize that God knows what is on your mind before you speak. There is no need for gibberish. What there IS a need for, however, is that you yourself acknowledge God (whether thanking Him, just talking one-to One, or asking Him for assistance) in your own language. While God is all-knowing, I think we can reasonably argue that even God would not understand anything that is without meaning.

Incidentally, I'm a little surprised that no one has so far come up with the old favorite ...'the tongues of angels!'

 

[Imagican]

Ok Jullian,

I'll bite.

I notice that you chose to leave the parts out that contradict your view. Paul is NOT encouraging the Corinthians to 'speak in tongues'. What Paul is doing is trying to point out that the 'tongues' that the Corinthians are practicing are unfruitful for the simple fact that they are being used for 'self-edification'. Paul plainly states that he would rather speak five words of understanding than 10,000 in an unknown tongue. Exactly what do YOU believe that he is saying here?

There is much indication through the study of this ancient part of the world that tongues existed in the religious practices of the Corinthians before Christ was introduced to them. If this is true, it is quite likely that Paul is trying to humbly explain to the Corinthians that their 'tongues' are NOT of Christ or God, but are being used to puff up oneself instead of for the benefit of the CHURCH. Paul also explains that he is still being forced to feed these people milk. The indication is that these folks were more interested in 'playing' Christian than actually following Christ. The indication being that they seemed more concerned with the 'appearance' of the Holy Spirit, than in actually Loving God and their neighbors as themselves. Self fulfillment instead of sacrifice of self.

There is absolutely no indication in the Bible that incoherent babbling is anything other than that. And further more, you failed to address the point that 'tongues' are for them that BELIEVE NOT. NOT for them that believe. You insist that there are two kinds of tongues but can offer no where that this second form is referred to in ANY positive light.

Those that deny this form of tongues have made much effort to point out that 'tongues' are languages. You contend that there is another form of 'tongues' that is babbling. What does Paul say of this babbling? For what purpose if NO ONE UNDERSTANDS IT? You may as well be speaking to the air. What does this indicate to you?

 

[kwag_myers]

Nice flame job SputnikBoy!

If tongues is not for today, then maybe salvation is not as well. Maybe we are just wasting our time here with all this religious stuff. How is it that you feel you can pick and choose which portions of the Bible to believe and which to ignore?

Jesus Himself stated that it would be a sign of those who follow Him (Mark 16:17), yet you apparently know more that He did. I don't think so. I think that it's your pride that keeps you from submitting yourself to the Holy Spirit. And since you can't speak in tongues, you justify yourself by persecuting those of us who can.

God created the earth by speaking. Jesus healed by speaking. There is power in the tongue (Matthew 17:20; Luke 4:32). But we should abstain from speaking in tongues because the devil has a copy-cat? I don't think so. Only a wimp would shy away from the devil. I choose to take back what the devil has stolen, knowing that the Holy Spirit gives me power to put Satan under my feet. You don't know the difference between Voodoo and the Holy Spirit because you don't know the Holy Spirit (John 10:4).

You are correct in saying that there is no need for gibberish, yet you continue with it.

As for the tongues of angles, I believe that you are referring to 1 Corinthians 13:1. Actually, in the King James, this is the only place where the phrase is used. My take on this verse is that it doesn't matter if we speak in tongues if we fail to show God's love. It suggests that Paul spoke in tongues, but isn't as applicable to us as Mark 16:17.

 

[Julian Pyke]

Acts two is the one where tongues is being spoken and all can understand of differnt nationalities. This is the tongues for those who believe not. In Corinthians, Paul is saying HOW THEY ARE MISUAING tongues. He said he thanks God that he speaks in tongues more then ye all, and he said if ye pray in tongues pray for an interpreter. Are you ignoring that fact? yes, I know he is correcting the cornith church, he is saying how they are misusing it. Then he goes on to say how to use it properly.

Acts 2 is the otngues where everyone understands
Corinthians is where the tongue where your spirit man speaks to God. (As clearly said, speaks not unto men but unto God, for in his spirit he speaketh mysteries)