Tongues As A Sign For Unbelievers.

[PaulChristensen]

I'm not comfortable with making such assumptions as to the why - and I suggest you look carefully at your reasons for having done so. 1. It is not right for tongues to be spoken without an interpreter present, therefore there is an implied responsibility upon that one who has the gift to interpret. 2. If the congregation was paused waiting for an interpretation, there was an awkward moment when everybody knew that they couldn't interpret the message. Why did nobody call out "is there anyone who can tell us what that means?". Something doesn't add up, but that doesn't mean that it is necessarily not true. Only that somehow the one who could interpret it has failed to do so. I don't think you should be making excuses for him, but it's typical that you would do so if you are trying to defend the practice.

I didn't perceive any cause to doubt the truthfulness of the story until you had mentioned it. Even now that you have mentioned it, I don't see a cause to doubt it. I am looking for an explanation as to why the interpretation wasn't given. That's the #1 problem with tongues: not that it is being practiced, but that it isn't being practiced in a God-given way (ie: 1 Corinthians 14:40).

A first-hand testimony is most useful, thank you

I remember that. Another great testimony! These examples are much different than the glossolalia babbling that comes from the flesh. The distinction needs to be made.

I wasn't in the church service where the tongues message was given and not interpreted. Nor did I have the opportunity to talk with the visitor or the pastor. Therefore I don't have any first-hand knowledge of what actually happened and why.

It seemed that the person who gave the tongues message did in faith expecting an interpretation, and so might have felt embarrassed and puzzled why an interpretation didn't come. I would say that it would be encouraged for the person to know that the tongue he spoke was an understandable language to another person in the service. So, it appears that the person who gave the tongues message didn't intend to be disobedient to Paul's clear teaching about it.

I fully agree with you that Paul gave clear recommendations about how tongues should be used. It is quite clear that Paul's approved use of tongues in church should be accompanied with interpretation so that everyone can be encouraged and built up in their faith. He was quite clear that speaking out loud in tongues with no intention of interpretation is equivalent to a person speaking into the air, and would be totally meaningless to everyone else in the meeting. And, not everyone has the ministry of church tongues.

So, if a person wanted to speak in tongues and there is no interpreter present he should not speak out in church, but to pray to himself and to God. That is quite possible in a church service, and I have often prayed in tongues very quietly when it has been appropriate so that not even someone sitting beside me would hear me.

But this does not stop me praying in tongues any time I wanted to in my private prayer times. That is my business and no one else's, and anyone trying to tell me how to pray in my own private room would certainly get the bum's rush from me!

Concerning the use of the gifts of the Spirit in churches, there would be appropriate times for that to happen. In strictly programmed non-Charismatic church services there would be no opportunity at all, and therefore, none of the gifts would be used.

In Charismatic churches there is a slot marked for impromptu worship, and as part of that tongues messages, interpretations, and prophecies could take place. The same churches invite those who require prayer could come to the front after the main service to receive prayer from the ministry team. This is where the gifts of the Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom and Discerning of Spirits could be used by those in the ministry team. These gifts would be used only by those who have shown by experience and use have developed the discernment between what is true or false, and are usually church elders, or experienced deacons appointed to the ministry team. These gifts are not for inexperienced novices.

The problem, which has been harmful to Charismatic and Pentecostal churches is that inexperienced novices not recognised by the church leadership have involved themselves in unauthorised use of the revelation gifts, and given false words of knowledge and wisdom, and have misdiagnosed the spirits of members through the wrong use of discerning of spirits.

The gifts of healing are reserved for the elders of the church, according to the teaching of James. The working of miracles and the gift of faith are likewise for the use of experienced, mature, recognised ministries within the church.

The big problems that have brought many areas of the Charismatic church into disrepute have been caused by inexperienced novices having been converted to Christ for five minutes, running around trying to minister like the big boys. Paul was quite clear about that in his instructions for the appointment of church leaders. They should not be spiritual beginners lest they be lifted up with pride and fall into the condemnation of the devil whose pride scuppered him right at the start.

Therefore most of the false prophecies, fake healings, and other misuse of the spiritual gifts have been through people who have been puffed up with pride into thinking they are special people whom God favours, forgetting that God is no respecter of persons.

 

[Serving Zion]

I wasn't in the church service where the tongues message was given and not interpreted. Nor did I have the opportunity to talk with the visitor or the pastor. Therefore I don't have any first-hand knowledge of what actually happened and why.

It seemed that the person who gave the tongues message did in faith expecting an interpretation, and so might have felt embarrassed and puzzled why an interpretation didn't come. I would say that it would be encouraged for the person to know that the tongue he spoke was an understandable language to another person in the service. So, it appears that the person who gave the tongues message didn't intend to be disobedient to Paul's clear teaching about it.

I fully agree with you that Paul gave clear recommendations about how tongues should be used. It is quite clear that Paul's approved use of tongues in church should be accompanied with interpretation so that everyone can be encouraged and built up in their faith. He was quite clear that speaking out loud in tongues with no intention of interpretation is equivalent to a person speaking into the air, and would be totally meaningless to everyone else in the meeting. And, not everyone has the ministry of church tongues.

So, if a person wanted to speak in tongues and there is no interpreter present he should not speak out in church, but to pray to himself and to God. That is quite possible in a church service, and I have often prayed in tongues very quietly when it has been appropriate so that not even someone sitting beside me would hear me.

But this does not stop me praying in tongues any time I wanted to in my private prayer times. That is my business and no one else's, and anyone trying to tell me how to pray in my own private room would certainly get the bum's rush from me!

Concerning the use of the gifts of the Spirit in churches, there would be appropriate times for that to happen. In strictly programmed non-Charismatic church services there would be no opportunity at all, and therefore, none of the gifts would be used.

In Charismatic churches there is a slot marked for impromptu worship, and as part of that tongues messages, interpretations, and prophecies could take place. The same churches invite those who require prayer could come to the front after the main service to receive prayer from the ministry team. This is where the gifts of the Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom and Discerning of Spirits could be used by those in the ministry team. These gifts would be used only by those who have shown by experience and use have developed the discernment between what is true or false, and are usually church elders, or experienced deacons appointed to the ministry team. These gifts are not for inexperienced novices.

The problem, which has been harmful to Charismatic and Pentecostal churches is that inexperienced novices not recognised by the church leadership have involved themselves in unauthorised use of the revelation gifts, and given false words of knowledge and wisdom, and have misdiagnosed the spirits of members through the wrong use of discerning of spirits.

The gifts of healing are reserved for the elders of the church, according to the teaching of James. The working of miracles and the gift of faith are likewise for the use of experienced, mature, recognised ministries within the church.

The big problems that have brought many areas of the Charismatic church into disrepute have been caused by inexperienced novices having been converted to Christ for five minutes, running around trying to minister like the big boys. Paul was quite clear about that in his instructions for the appointment of church leaders. They should not be spiritual beginners lest they be lifted up with pride and fall into the condemnation of the devil whose pride scuppered him right at the start.

Therefore most of the false prophecies, fake healings, and other misuse of the spiritual gifts have been through people who have been puffed up with pride into thinking they are special people whom God favours, forgetting that God is no respecter of persons.

That's interesting, because my day began with a quote from someone about the quenching of the spirit. What you're describing there is the "old-boy's" wanting to make sure they aren't usurped by some young bucks. Jesus Himself rebuked His disciples for doing that (Mark 9:38-39). I've got plenty to say about that, but it's all off-topic on this thread.

As far as speaking in tongues goes here, it's clear that when someone does it and there is no interpretation given, it is meaningless to the bystanders, and for those unbelieving it is even harmful. The greater problem though is the feigning of the gift, which is the result of peer-pressure and doctrines that say a person needs to be doing it otherwise they aren't truly "born-again". If a person is forcing the glossolalia without having received it of the genuine gift of God, that's more than the flesh, it is intellectual dishonesty and we know that no lie is of God.

 

[tdidymas]

When you can quote a Scripture in context that shows that either Jesus or Paul said directly that the gifts were temporary and for use only until the Christian church became established, or that the gifts were confined for the use of the Apostles of Christ only, then I might find your comments about modern tongues of some merit.

You just don't get it. You think that because I believe modern P/C tongues is not the same as Biblical tongues, that you assume I am a cessationist. Not true, and you jump to false conclusions as usual. I said before that God can use anything, even a person self-deceived and misusing His name. A once or twice encounter with God doesn't justify the obsession of P/Cs with fake tongues. P/Cs are often given to exaggerations, so my doubts are reasonable.

Besides, what do you do with Heb. 2:4? The writer of this epistle wrote under the inspiration of the Spirit, and he did not acknowledge himself as one of the apostles who performed signs. Yet, it is the expectation of P/Cs that everyone filled with the Spirit will speak in tongues, contrary to what the Bible teaches (1 Cor. 12:30). It is an indication that modern tongues is not miraculous, because it is assumed that everyone can do it, and some denominations actually have official doctrine saying so.

You can read my previous post just before and what I told actually were real events. You can call all my friends and me liars if you want. That is your choice, but the fact that two people prayed in tongues and what was said was understood by others, is real and true, and undermines your opposition to modern tongues.

"Liar" is an exaggerative term, because it has the connotation of speaking untruth intentionally. Since P/Cs often exaggerate their experiences, I would say they are typically self-deceived and hyped up. But even if what you related is the truth, I say that God can use anything, even self-deceived people. It doesn't prove that modern P/C tongues in general is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[JLB]

A miracle is seen and heard in the physical universe, not just felt in your imagination.

Yes, that is why the baptism with the Holy Spirit, the Promise of the Father, comes with evidence that is seen and heard.


This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. Acts 2:32-33

 

[JLB]

You just don't get it. You think that because I believe modern P/C tongues is not the same as Biblical tongues, that you assume I am a cessationist. Not true, and you jump to false conclusions as usual. I said before that God can use anything, even a person self-deceived and misusing His name. A once or twice encounter with God doesn't justify the obsession of P/Cs with fake tongues. P/Cs are often given to exaggerations, so my doubts are reasonable.

Besides, what do you do with Heb. 2:4? The writer of this epistle wrote under the inspiration of the Spirit, and he did not acknowledge himself as one of the apostles who performed signs. Yet, it is the expectation of P/Cs that everyone filled with the Spirit will speak in tongues, contrary to what the Bible teaches (1 Cor. 12:30). It is an indication that modern tongues is not miraculous, because it is assumed that everyone can do it, and some denominations actually have official doctrine saying so.

"Liar" is an exaggerative term, because it has the connotation of speaking untruth intentionally. Since P/Cs often exaggerate their experiences, I would say they are typically self-deceived and hyped up. But even if what you related is the truth, I say that God can use anything, even self-deceived people. It doesn't prove that modern P/C tongues in general is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

How would define a person as being a “Pentecostal”?


Isn't the term “Pentecostal” a reference to a person who speaks in tongues?


If you believe the gift of the Spirit called “tongues” is not for modern times, then why do you call people “Pentecostal”?

 

[tdidymas]

Yes, that is why the baptism with the Holy Spirit, the Promise of the Father, comes with evidence that is seen and heard.


This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. Acts 2:32-33

You're jumping into a conversation you don't know anything about, so you're not on the same page. My contention is that modern tongues is not the same thing as Biblical tongues. You should read the previous posts of this conversation depicted by the up arrows before piping in.

 

[tdidymas]

How would define a person as being a “Pentecostal”?

It's a denomination.

Isn't the term “Pentecostal” a reference to a person who speaks in tongues?

Yes, it's the denomination in which people think they are speaking in other languages they haven't learned.

If you believe the gift of the Spirit called “tongues” is not for modern times, then why do you call people “Pentecostal”?

I never said tongues is not for modern times, even though it is reasonable to assume it. My contention is that modern tongues is not the same thing as Biblical tongues, and that it is not miraculous. I call people Pentecostals because that's what they call themselves.

 

[PaulChristensen]

That's interesting, because my day began with a quote from someone about the quenching of the spirit. What you're describing there is the "old-boy's" wanting to make sure they aren't usurped by some young bucks. Jesus Himself rebuked His disciples for doing that (Mark 9:38-39). I've got plenty to say about that, but it's all off-topic on this thread.

As far as speaking in tongues goes here, it's clear that when someone does it and there is no interpretation given, it is meaningless to the bystanders, and for those unbelieving it is even harmful. The greater problem though is the feigning of the gift, which is the result of peer-pressure and doctrines that say a person needs to be doing it otherwise they aren't truly "born-again". If a person is forcing the glossolalia without having received it of the genuine gift of God, that's more than the flesh, it is intellectual dishonesty and we know that no lie is of God.

I agree. We must be sure that what we are doing in our public worship of God that we know what God's Word says and that we worship Him in the way His Word shows us as the type of worship that is acceptable to Him.

Concerning tongues, Paul strongly recommended that any public utterance of tongues should be accompanied by interpretation. If there are no interpreters, if a person wanted to pray in tongues, he should do it to himself and to God. If he is in church, then he should pray in tongues quietly under his breath and not out loud, or else save it until he gets home and goes into his private prayer room when he can pray to his heart's content with God being the only listener.

Paul did say that those in the Corinthian church who did speak out loud in tongues were "giving thanks well enough", but were speaking into the air because no one understands him, therefore, it would be better if he prophesied so that others could benefit from what he is saying.

So, to automatically say that modern folk who speak in tongues in church without interpretation are in the flesh and not the Spirit is unwise given that Paul did say that those who spoke in tongues were giving thanks to God acceptably. It all depends on what is in the heart of the speaker. Man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the heart.

But, according to what we see on Youtube, there could be much misuse of the gift because of the speakers' hearts not being right with God and therefore their utterances could well be in the flesh. But because we don't see what is in the heart of people, any judgment we make has to be unreliable. It is best to give people the benefit of the doubt in these matters.

 

[PaulChristensen]

You just don't get it. You think that because I believe modern P/C tongues is not the same as Biblical tongues, that you assume I am a cessationist. Not true, and you jump to false conclusions as usual. I said before that God can use anything, even a person self-deceived and misusing His name. A once or twice encounter with God doesn't justify the obsession of P/Cs with fake tongues. P/Cs are often given to exaggerations, so my doubts are reasonable.

Besides, what do you do with Heb. 2:4? The writer of this epistle wrote under the inspiration of the Spirit, and he did not acknowledge himself as one of the apostles who performed signs. Yet, it is the expectation of P/Cs that everyone filled with the Spirit will speak in tongues, contrary to what the Bible teaches (1 Cor. 12:30). It is an indication that modern tongues is not miraculous, because it is assumed that everyone can do it, and some denominations actually have official doctrine saying so.

"Liar" is an exaggerative term, because it has the connotation of speaking untruth intentionally. Since P/Cs often exaggerate their experiences, I would say they are typically self-deceived and hyped up. But even if what you related is the truth, I say that God can use anything, even self-deceived people. It doesn't prove that modern P/C tongues in general is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

This is not about me. You don't know me from a bar of soap, so your "you" messages to me are quite ineffective and can be safely ignored. I respect your views and happy to discuss them as long as you keep the personalised "you" messages out of it.

 

[tdidymas]

This is not about me. You don't know me from a bar of soap, so your "you" messages to me are quite ineffective and can be safely ignored. I respect your views and happy to discuss them as long as you keep the personalised "you" messages out of it.

You can say "you" but I can't? Isn't that a double standard?

I just don't get that you respect my views at all. I quote scripture, and then explain what it means in context, and you either ignore it, or you disagree, saying it's just my opinion. When I ask a question, you ignore that also. I'm getting this from reading your responses.

But I get the idea that you're offended at my responses because whenever you give an opinion that I think is unreasonable or unbiblical, I prove it out, and you just seem to not like that. It also seems like whenever I make a generalized comment about P/Cs, you appear to take it personally. Do you think it is a personal affront that I am skeptical and don't just believe anything you say?

Here is a general statement: P/Cs rely heavily on personal experience, and tend to interpret the Bible through that lens. Well, if that applies to you, then I can see how you could be offended by it. Do you see where I'm coming from here?

 

[Serving Zion]

If he is in church, then he should pray in tongues quietly under his breath and not out loud

Which part of scripture do you have in mind to support this in the face of 1 Corinthians 14:23?

because we don't see what is in the heart of people,

You can only speak for yourself in saying that.

 

[PaulChristensen]

You can say "you" but I can't? Isn't that a double standard?

I just don't get that you respect my views at all. I quote scripture, and then explain what it means in context, and you either ignore it, or you disagree, saying it's just my opinion. When I ask a question, you ignore that also. I'm getting this from reading your responses.

But I get the idea that you're offended at my responses because whenever you give an opinion that I think is unreasonable or unbiblical, I prove it out, and you just seem to not like that. It also seems like whenever I make a generalized comment about P/Cs, you appear to take it personally. Do you think it is a personal affront that I am skeptical and don't just believe anything you say?

Here is a general statement: P/Cs rely heavily on personal experience, and tend to interpret the Bible through that lens. Well, if that applies to you, then I can see how you could be offended by it. Do you see where I'm coming from here?

 

[PaulChristensen]

You can say "you" but I can't? Isn't that a double standard?

I just don't get that you respect my views at all. I quote scripture, and then explain what it means in context, and you either ignore it, or you disagree, saying it's just my opinion. When I ask a question, you ignore that also. I'm getting this from reading your responses.

But I get the idea that you're offended at my responses because whenever you give an opinion that I think is unreasonable or unbiblical, I prove it out, and you just seem to not like that. It also seems like whenever I make a generalized comment about P/Cs, you appear to take it personally. Do you think it is a personal affront that I am skeptical and don't just believe anything you say?

Here is a general statement: P/Cs rely heavily on personal experience, and tend to interpret the Bible through that lens. Well, if that applies to you, then I can see how you could be offended by it. Do you see where I'm coming from here?

The reality is that our knowledge of the things of God are limited by us looking through the wrong end of the telescope (ie, through a glass darkly). Our knowledge is only partial.

Also, like it or not, we were conditioned as young believers through what our mentors taught us. For the first 12 years of my Christian walk I was in Pentecostal churches, so all my mentors were Pentecostal. In the first two years, I became as Pentecostal as one could get - passionate, loud, preaching to everyone, and generally making an pest of myself. Then I realised that although I was doing all the religious stuff that I was taught, I didn't know God personally. So, I started seeking the Lord earnestly to come to a point where I could meet Him and know Him, otherwise, I might as well give it all away, because without knowing God Himself, all the other religious stuff, including the Pentecostal, was pointless, to me anyway.

So, one April night at 11pm, I went out into the middle of a golf course, looked up to the starry sky, told God that He was in earshot of my voice, and that I had come out to introduce myself to Him. I told Him that if I didn't know Him that night, I would give it all away because there was no use being religious if I didn't know Him. Then I said, "I am Paul and you are God and I'm very glad to meet you." Immediately I felt all lit up inside like Times Square, and I knew that Jesus was real. This was not emotional because in the Southern Hemisphere April is late Autumn and at 11pm it can be fairly cool. It was like one moment God was not real to me, and then the next moment He was. Then I started getting clear thoughts that I had not received before. The first thought was, "We have been waiting for this for a long time." I asked the Lord, "Why?" The answer came back, "We have been waiting for you to stop trying to do the religious stuff and to come to Me directly." I then asked, "How do I become a real Christian?" He said, "Walk before Me and be perfect, but just be yourself." I said, "I can't do that. People will see all my faults, sins and shortcomings!" He said, "If I don't like you, I will change you." This was the first time in my Christian walk that I was having a two-way conversation with God. It changed my whole view of what Christian life was all about. I asked the Lord about visions and dreams, and He told me that I didn't need them because I had His presence to guide me. I learned afterward that it is the indwelling Holy Spirit who was saying these things to me and making Jesus real to me. I asked Him how I am knowing that He is speaking to me. He said that He speaks to my spirit, and then my mind interprets what is in my spirit. It is a bit like compiling BASIC into machine language in a computer in reverse, like the computer receiving input as machine language and converting it into BASIC so the programmer can understand the programming.

I then asked the Lord what was happening to me, and He answered, "You are having fellowship with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ."

As I have matured, I have asked the Lord questions, or discussed an issue with Him, and although I have never memorized Scripture, the exact correct reference or verse has come back to me to either correct or confirm what I have been discussing with Him. It has also been remarkable that when I have gone to my favourite Christian second hand bookshop and chosen books at random, I have found that the books I have chosen have greatly increased my wisdom. A Christian friend introduced me to Puritan literature, and I found the Holy Spirit speaking to me in every page, giving me a solid foundation in the Faith. There were times when the manager of the Christian bookshop would email me with a book recommendation, and when I have brought that book home, the Lord has spoken to me through it in a remarkable way.

All this happened after I left the AOG church in 1968, and was involved with a small group of friends worshiping in a rented "converted" upstairs coffee bar in central Wellington NZ. A year later I fellowshipped with a suburban Nazarene church, then after that I moved cities, ending up in an independent mission church with a very strict Pentecostal Holiness pastor who really sorted me out on many issues, and taught me about the true ministry of the Holy Spirit. He firmly believed that when the Holy Spirit was really present, people would get on their faces, repent, and have a strong desire for personal holiness. He had no time for the popular Pentecostalism of the time. He believed that praying in tongues was totally sacred, and he demonstrated God healing the sick in his ministry with a number of verified healings to his credit. He believed that if a person was to have a ministry in the Spirit he had to be a man of the Word and of prayer. When he gave me correction, he would get out his big black Bible and show me the Scriptures where I had gone wrong and how to put things right. That was three years of real discipleship toward walking in the Spirit in holiness as a requirement for everything else. That was the discipleship that stood the test of time for me after 50 years, when all my other Pentecostal mentors' teaching fell by the wayside and passed into the mists of history.

Therefore I am just as evangelical as you are, and just as committed to Christ and Him crucified. My basic theology is Puritan Reformed, and sort of Calvinist (I pick the meat from the bones with him), and with the sure confidence that the 1 Corinthians 12 gifts of the Spirit are still available to the Body of Christ today.

My actual experience is that I don't see the gifts actually manifested in my present little Union church with six elderly ladies and one other man. Nor did I see them manifested in the 23 years I was an elder of an Auckland Presbyterian church. But my belief in the continuation of the spiritual gifts is not based on my personal experience but on the fact that 1 Corinthians 12 list of gifts was never meant to be temporary, but are in place until the end of the church age.

I know that there is much misuse of the gifts in the lunatic fringe that pretends to be Pentecostal, but these groups do not represent and majority of Pentecostals and Charismatics who are like me, desiring to see the gifts manifested and sad that we don't see them as often as we would like.

So, if you have had similar experience of meeting and knowing God personally, and being discipled by sound and faithful men and women of God throughout your Christian walk, then we would have a lot in common.

 

[PaulChristensen]

You can say "you" but I can't? Isn't that a double standard?

I just don't get that you respect my views at all. I quote scripture, and then explain what it means in context, and you either ignore it, or you disagree, saying it's just my opinion. When I ask a question, you ignore that also. I'm getting this from reading your responses.

But I get the idea that you're offended at my responses because whenever you give an opinion that I think is unreasonable or unbiblical, I prove it out, and you just seem to not like that. It also seems like whenever I make a generalized comment about P/Cs, you appear to take it personally. Do you think it is a personal affront that I am skeptical and don't just believe anything you say?

Here is a general statement: P/Cs rely heavily on personal experience, and tend to interpret the Bible through that lens. Well, if that applies to you, then I can see how you could be offended by it. Do you see where I'm coming from here?

The reality is that our knowledge of the things of God are limited by us looking through the wrong end of the telescope (ie, through a glass darkly). Our knowledge is only partial.

Also, like it or not, we were conditioned as young believers through what our mentors taught us. For the first 12 years of my Christian walk I was in Pentecostal churches, so all my mentors were Pentecostal. In the first two years, I became as Pentecostal as one could get - passionate, loud, preaching to everyone, and generally making an pest of myself. Then I realised that although I was doing all the religious stuff that I was taught, I didn't know God personally. So, I started seeking the Lord earnestly to come to a point where I could meet Him and know Him, otherwise, I might as well give it all away, because without knowing God Himself, all the other religious stuff, including the Pentecostal, was pointless, to me anyway.

So, one April night at 11pm, I went out into the middle of a golf course, looked up to the starry sky, told God that He was in earshot of my voice, and that I had come out to introduce myself to Him. I told Him that if I didn't know Him that night, I would give it all away because there was no use being religious if I didn't know Him. Then I said, "I am Paul and you are God and I'm very glad to meet you." Immediately I felt all lit up inside like Times Square, and I knew that Jesus was real. This was not emotional because in the Southern Hemisphere April is late Autumn and at 11pm it can be fairly cool. It was like one moment God was not real to me, and then the next moment He was. Then I started getting clear thoughts that I had not received before. The first thought was, "We have been waiting for this for a long time." I asked the Lord, "Why?" The answer came back, "We have been waiting for you to stop trying to do the religious stuff and to come to Me directly." I then asked, "How do I become a real Christian?" He said, "Walk before Me and be perfect, but just be yourself." I said, "I can't do that. People will see all my faults, sins and shortcomings!" He said, "If I don't like you, I will change you." This was the first time in my Christian walk that I was having a two-way conversation with God. It changed my whole view of what Christian life was all about. I asked the Lord about visions and dreams, and He told me that I didn't need them because I had His presence to guide me. I learned afterward that it is the indwelling Holy Spirit who was saying these things to me and making Jesus real to me. I asked Him how I am knowing that He is speaking to me. He said that He speaks to my spirit, and then my mind interprets what is in my spirit. It is a bit like compiling BASIC into machine language in a computer in reverse, like the computer receiving input as machine language and converting it into BASIC so the programmer can understand the programming.

I then asked the Lord what was happening to me, and He answered, "You are having fellowship with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ."

As I have matured, I have asked the Lord questions, or discussed an issue with Him, and although I have never memorized Scripture, the exact correct reference or verse has come back to me to either correct or confirm what I have been discussing with Him. It has also been remarkable that when I have gone to my favourite Christian second hand bookshop and chosen books at random, I have found that the books I have chosen have greatly increased my wisdom. A Christian friend introduced me to Puritan literature, and I found the Holy Spirit speaking to me in every page, giving me a solid foundation in the Faith. There were times when the manager of the Christian bookshop would email me with a book recommendation, and when I have brought that book home, the Lord has spoken to me through it in a remarkable way.

All this happened after I left the AOG church in 1968, and was involved with a small group of friends worshiping in a rented "converted" upstairs coffee bar in central Wellington NZ. A year later I fellowshipped with a suburban Nazarene church, then after that I moved cities, ending up in an independent mission church with a very strict Pentecostal Holiness pastor who really sorted me out on many issues, and taught me about the true ministry of the Holy Spirit. He firmly believed that when the Holy Spirit was really present, people would get on their faces, repent, and have a strong desire for personal holiness. He had no time for the popular Pentecostalism of the time. He believed that praying in tongues was totally sacred, and he demonstrated God healing the sick in his ministry with a number of verified healings to his credit. He believed that if a person was to have a ministry in the Spirit he had to be a man of the Word and of prayer. When he gave me correction, he would get out his big black Bible and show me the Scriptures where I had gone wrong and how to put things right. That was three years of real discipleship toward walking in the Spirit in holiness as a requirement for everything else. That was the discipleship that stood the test of time for me after 50 years, when all my other Pentecostal mentors' teaching fell by the wayside and passed into the mists of history.

Therefore I am just as evangelical as you are, and just as committed to Christ and Him crucified. My basic theology is Puritan Reformed, and sort of Calvinist (I pick the meat from the bones with him), and with the sure confidence that the 1 Corinthians 12 gifts of the Spirit are still available to the Body of Christ today.

My actual experience is that I don't see the gifts actually manifested in my present little Union church with six elderly ladies and one other man. Nor did I see them manifested in the 23 years I was an elder of an Auckland Presbyterian church. But my belief in the continuation of the spiritual gifts is not based on my personal experience but on the fact that 1 Corinthians 12 list of gifts was never meant to be temporary, but are in place until the end of the church age.

I know that there is much misuse of the gifts in the lunatic fringe that pretends to be Pentecostal, but these groups do not represent and majority of Pentecostals and Charismatics who are like me, desiring to see the gifts manifested and sad that we don't see them as often as we would like.

So, if you have had similar experience of meeting and knowing God personally, and being discipled by sound and faithful men and women of God throughout your Christian walk, then we would have a lot in common.

 

[PaulChristensen]

Which part of scripture do you have in mind to support this in the face of 1 Corinthians 14:23?

You can only speak for yourself in saying that.

Your first point:
1 Corinthians 14:2: "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."
And:
"But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God" (1 Corinthians 14:28).

So Paul is not saying that the tongues spoken is false, or of the flesh or the devil. Here is another verse:
"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? For you indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified" (VV 16-17). (the bold font is mine).
If Paul thought that the tongues were of the flesh or the devil he would not have describe the speaking of tongues as "blessing with the spirit" and "giving thanks" [to God]. What he is saying that one can pray in tongues as much as he wishes in his private time with God but in church he should be silent unless he is prepared to prophesy in language that everyone can be instructed.

Verse 23 is the expected result when a whole group is all speaking in tongues which no one understands, so it would sound like a lot of confused gibberish to those who are uninformed about what tongues really is - prayer in the spirit to God. We see this quite clearly in the Youtube video clips we see of the same thing happening in those lunatic fringe groups who are not following Paul's clear instructions to keep tongues-speaking to the private prayer room, unless there is interpretation of tongues that make it all make sense to everyone.

So, you don't believe the Scripture where Samuel said, "Man looks on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart." Of course there are some in the lunatic fringe section who believe that there are "seers" who can look right through people and see what is in their hearts. But this is the New Age mystical counterfeit of the true gift of the Word of Knowledge. In my younger days with the AOG it was implied that truly spiritual men of God could see what was in our hearts, but as I matured and gained a better knowledge of God's Word, I learned that this type of thing was more of the Occult than the Holy Spirit.

We don't know what is in the hearts of people. You wouldn't know that the person sitting beside you at church was a genuine believer or a hypocrite, because both walk the walk and talk the talk just the same. This is why the counterfeit is no close to the genuine that many times it is impossible to tell them apart from each other. This is according to the parable of the wheat and the tares, and Jesus saying that it is better to wait until the judgment before they can be separated because harm can be done to genuine believers if there are heresy and hypocrite witch hunts to try and weed out the counterfeit from the genuine.

 

[tdidymas]

The reality is that our knowledge of the things of God are limited by us looking through the wrong end of the telescope (ie, through a glass darkly). Our knowledge is only partial.

Also, like it or not, we were conditioned as young believers through what our mentors taught us. For the first 12 years of my Christian walk I was in Pentecostal churches, so all my mentors were Pentecostal. In the first two years, I became as Pentecostal as one could get - passionate, loud, preaching to everyone, and generally making an pest of myself. Then I realised that although I was doing all the religious stuff that I was taught, I didn't know God personally. So, I started seeking the Lord earnestly to come to a point where I could meet Him and know Him, otherwise, I might as well give it all away, because without knowing God Himself, all the other religious stuff, including the Pentecostal, was pointless, to me anyway.

So, one April night at 11pm, I went out into the middle of a golf course, looked up to the starry sky, told God that He was in earshot of my voice, and that I had come out to introduce myself to Him. I told Him that if I didn't know Him that night, I would give it all away because there was no use being religious if I didn't know Him. Then I said, "I am Paul and you are God and I'm very glad to meet you." Immediately I felt all lit up inside like Times Square, and I knew that Jesus was real. This was not emotional because in the Southern Hemisphere April is late Autumn and at 11pm it can be fairly cool. It was like one moment God was not real to me, and then the next moment He was. Then I started getting clear thoughts that I had not received before. The first thought was, "We have been waiting for this for a long time." I asked the Lord, "Why?" The answer came back, "We have been waiting for you to stop trying to do the religious stuff and to come to Me directly." I then asked, "How do I become a real Christian?" He said, "Walk before Me and be perfect, but just be yourself." I said, "I can't do that. People will see all my faults, sins and shortcomings!" He said, "If I don't like you, I will change you." This was the first time in my Christian walk that I was having a two-way conversation with God. It changed my whole view of what Christian life was all about. I asked the Lord about visions and dreams, and He told me that I didn't need them because I had His presence to guide me. I learned afterward that it is the indwelling Holy Spirit who was saying these things to me and making Jesus real to me. I asked Him how I am knowing that He is speaking to me. He said that He speaks to my spirit, and then my mind interprets what is in my spirit. It is a bit like compiling BASIC into machine language in a computer in reverse, like the computer receiving input as machine language and converting it into BASIC so the programmer can understand the programming.

I then asked the Lord what was happening to me, and He answered, "You are having fellowship with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ."

As I have matured, I have asked the Lord questions, or discussed an issue with Him, and although I have never memorized Scripture, the exact correct reference or verse has come back to me to either correct or confirm what I have been discussing with Him. It has also been remarkable that when I have gone to my favourite Christian second hand bookshop and chosen books at random, I have found that the books I have chosen have greatly increased my wisdom. A Christian friend introduced me to Puritan literature, and I found the Holy Spirit speaking to me in every page, giving me a solid foundation in the Faith. There were times when the manager of the Christian bookshop would email me with a book recommendation, and when I have brought that book home, the Lord has spoken to me through it in a remarkable way.

All this happened after I left the AOG church in 1968, and was involved with a small group of friends worshiping in a rented "converted" upstairs coffee bar in central Wellington NZ. A year later I fellowshipped with a suburban Nazarene church, then after that I moved cities, ending up in an independent mission church with a very strict Pentecostal Holiness pastor who really sorted me out on many issues, and taught me about the true ministry of the Holy Spirit. He firmly believed that when the Holy Spirit was really present, people would get on their faces, repent, and have a strong desire for personal holiness. He had no time for the popular Pentecostalism of the time. He believed that praying in tongues was totally sacred, and he demonstrated God healing the sick in his ministry with a number of verified healings to his credit. He believed that if a person was to have a ministry in the Spirit he had to be a man of the Word and of prayer. When he gave me correction, he would get out his big black Bible and show me the Scriptures where I had gone wrong and how to put things right. That was three years of real discipleship toward walking in the Spirit in holiness as a requirement for everything else. That was the discipleship that stood the test of time for me after 50 years, when all my other Pentecostal mentors' teaching fell by the wayside and passed into the mists of history.

Therefore I am just as evangelical as you are, and just as committed to Christ and Him crucified. My basic theology is Puritan Reformed, and sort of Calvinist (I pick the meat from the bones with him), and with the sure confidence that the 1 Corinthians 12 gifts of the Spirit are still available to the Body of Christ today.

My actual experience is that I don't see the gifts actually manifested in my present little Union church with six elderly ladies and one other man. Nor did I see them manifested in the 23 years I was an elder of an Auckland Presbyterian church. But my belief in the continuation of the spiritual gifts is not based on my personal experience but on the fact that 1 Corinthians 12 list of gifts was never meant to be temporary, but are in place until the end of the church age.

I know that there is much misuse of the gifts in the lunatic fringe that pretends to be Pentecostal, but these groups do not represent and majority of Pentecostals and Charismatics who are like me, desiring to see the gifts manifested and sad that we don't see them as often as we would like.

So, if you have had similar experience of meeting and knowing God personally, and being discipled by sound and faithful men and women of God throughout your Christian walk, then we would have a lot in common.

We may have a lot in common as far as discoveries in personal relationship with God and perhaps many struggles. I began studying the scripture for myself 46 years ago, because of so many controversies that I couldn't trust anyone to point me to the truth. So although I continued fellowshipping among the P/C churches for 20 years, I secretly was biding my time to discover the truth that I was to follow from the scriptures. Eventually I came to the same conclusions as the Reformed theologians, but without their help (only from my study of scripture). For the next 20 years I read a lot of materials written by them, and learned that all my conclusions had already been well thought out many years ago. But I had to find out for myself, because I trusted no one.

However, it looks to me like your progress, and the leadership of the holiness pastor you mentioned, could have been done without tongues speaking. All the things you talked about happen in churches with good leadership without any Pentecostal tradition or doctrine.

And you say that the 1 Cor. 12 list of gifts were not meant to be temporary, but in place until the end of the church age. How can you say this from the text of scripture, without using your personal experience or tradition from your Pentecostal leaders?

 

[Serving Zion]

What he is saying that one can pray in tongues as much as he wishes in his private time with God but in church he should be silent unless he is prepared to prophesy in language that everyone can be instructed.

Ok, that's what Paul said, but that's not what you have described:

then he should pray in tongues quietly under his breath and not out loud

You said he should pray quietly under his breath, but Paul said that he should keep silent: sigatō

it would sound like a lot of confused gibberish

That's only one part of the reason why it would give the impression that they are out of their mind. If the whole congregation was muttering under their breath, and it wasn't clear that they were muttering confused gibberish, it would give the same impression. That's why Paul says he would far rather speak five coherent words of instruction than a thousand in a tongue.

So, you don't believe the Scripture [...]

It's not very nice for you to do that. Why did you do that? Do you realise that it's against the ToS? Why have you become an enemy to me that will accuse me of not believing scripture without first asking for clarification?

We don't know what is in the hearts of people.

Again, you can only speak for yourself if you want to say things like that. Jesus has made very clear that it is from the heart that the mouth speaks, and a man is defiled by what his mouth reveals of his heart. In a similar way Paul says that the mouth confesses the belief of the heart (Romans 10:10). Furthermore, if the Word of God is able to divide through bone and marrow to reveal the intention of the heart, then it is only natural that we who bear witness to it also are bearing witness to the things it is bringing to light (Ephesians 5:13).

You wouldn't know that the person sitting beside you at church was a genuine believer or a hypocrite, because both walk the walk and talk the talk just the same.

Ditto. (See above).

This is why the counterfeit is no close to the genuine that many times it is impossible to tell them apart from each other. This is according to the parable of the wheat and the tares

That's not what the parable says though. I don't know where that rumour began, but I heard it a long time ago, and for a while I had carried that impression, but then one day I looked more closely at the text and I saw that it was when the plants started to spring up (therefore to germinate or to grow) that the weeds also appeared. So it was known right from the start that the weeds were among the wheat, and there is no indication that the weeds were indistinguishable from the wheat. The only concern is that by uprooting the weeds, some of the wheat could be damaged (because it is impossible to remove the weeds without causing some disturbance to the wheat, and inevitably some would be lost due to the trauma).

Jesus saying that it is better to wait until the judgment before they can be separated because harm can be done to genuine believers if there are heresy and hypocrite witch hunts to try and weed out the counterfeit from the genuine.

It worries me that you are even suggesting that it is man's responsibility to remove the weeds, because Jesus said that His angels would be sent to do that (Matthew 13:41).

 

[PaulChristensen]

We may have a lot in common as far as discoveries in personal relationship with God and perhaps many struggles. I began studying the scripture for myself 46 years ago, because of so many controversies that I couldn't trust anyone to point me to the truth. So although I continued fellowshipping among the P/C churches for 20 years, I secretly was biding my time to discover the truth that I was to follow from the scriptures. Eventually I came to the same conclusions as the Reformed theologians, but without their help (only from my study of scripture). For the next 20 years I read a lot of materials written by them, and learned that all my conclusions had already been well thought out many years ago. But I had to find out for myself, because I trusted no one.

However, it looks to me like your progress, and the leadership of the holiness pastor you mentioned, could have been done without tongues speaking. All the things you talked about happen in churches with good leadership without any Pentecostal tradition or doctrine.

And you say that the 1 Cor. 12 list of gifts were not meant to be temporary, but in place until the end of the church age. How can you say this from the text of scripture, without using your personal experience or tradition from your Pentecostal leaders?

Tongues is just one tool in the Holy Spirit toolbox. Reformed or Holiness Charismatics are no different from Reformed or Holiness evangelicals, except that the former believe 1 Corinthians 12 in its entirety is written for all churches for the duration of the Church Age. The Apostles, including Paul believed that Christ was going to come in their own life times, so his view when he wrote 1 Corinthians 13:8 was that the second coming of Christ was going to cause tongues and prophecy to pass away, because he had no idea that the Church Age was going to continue for another 2000 years or so.

After I left the Pentecostal movement in 1978, I have fellowshipped with non-Charismatic churches ever since, so I no longer identify myself as a Pentecostal. I am a Christian believer who accepts the whole of 1 Corinthians 12 as being relevant for today's churches, instead of parts of it. Some churches believe the reference in 1 Corinthians 12 about the different roles in the Body of Christ, but reject the list of the gifts. Not logical. Either we believe the whole chapter or none of it. Also, within the list of gifts, there is "teacher", but some erase all the other gifts and leave "teacher". Doesn't make sense. If one is going to reject the gifts, then all of the gifts need to go, including that of teacher. But the ministry of teacher is still retained and generally accepted by all Evangelical churches. I believe it is because of the blind spot concerning the gifts of the Spirit that the totally senseless notion that some of the list is still relevant to churches and other bits are not. To my commonsense thinking it is either all or nothing. If 1 Corinthians is written for all believers everywhere as Paul said in chapter 1, then the whole book without any erasures applies to the whole church while it continues to exist, until the end of the age.

Even the most passionate cessationists fully acknowledge that there is not one Scripture that supports the cessationist doctrine, but they also maintain that there are no Scriptures to deny it either. So, by their own admission, they are basing the doctrine on Scriptural silence. They believe that the gifts were relevant in Paul's time, but not in ours, because they see that the gifts did decline after the 4th Century, (although in the Eastern Orthodox churches they continued on until the 12th Century A.D.) Also, there are many testimonies throughout church history of miraculous healing, including a close friend of Augustine, Augustine himself, 70 others over two years in his churches, and many others in Puritan England, John Wesley's ministry and right through to the present time. Right up until 1900 all the recorded and verified healings were of non-Pentecostals. So, it is clear that the gift of healing did not decline at all. In relatively modern times, in India, there have been many instances of healing miracles, also in Brazil, Africa and right around the world. Anyone who says that all the multitude of testimonies are lies are just living in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

 

[PaulChristensen]

Ok, that's what Paul said, but that's not what you have described:

You said he should pray quietly under his breath, but Paul said that he should keep silent: sigatō

That's only one part of the reason why it would give the impression that they are out of their mind. If the whole congregation was muttering under their breath, and it wasn't clear that they were muttering confused gibberish, it would give the same impression. That's why Paul says he would far rather speak five coherent words of instruction than a thousand in a tongue.

It's not very nice for you to do that. Why did you do that? Do you realise that it's against the ToS? Why have you become an enemy to me that will accuse me of not believing scripture without first asking for clarification?

Again, you can only speak for yourself if you want to say things like that. Jesus has made very clear that it is from the heart that the mouth speaks, and a man is defiled by what his mouth reveals of his heart. In a similar way Paul says that the mouth confesses the belief of the heart (Romans 10:10). Furthermore, if the Word of God is able to divide through bone and marrow to reveal the intention of the heart, then it is only natural that we who bear witness to it also are bearing witness to the things it is bringing to light (Ephesians 5:13).

Ditto. (See above).

That's not what the parable says though. I don't know where that rumour began, but I heard it a long time ago, and for a while I had carried that impression, but then one day I looked more closely at the text and I saw that it was when the plants started to spring up (therefore to germinate or to grow) that the weeds also appeared. So it was known right from the start that the weeds were among the wheat, and there is no indication that the weeds were indistinguishable from the wheat. The only concern is that by uprooting the weeds, some of the wheat could be damaged (because it is impossible to remove the weeds without causing some disturbance to the wheat, and inevitably some would be lost due to the trauma).

It worries me that you are even suggesting that it is man's responsibility to remove the weeds, because Jesus said that His angels would be sent to do that (Matthew 13:41).

If you believe in "seers" who can see into the hearts of people, so be it. If you believe that people have a special gift to be able to distinguish between what is true and what is counterfeit, the best of British luck to you.

Hypocrites can join a church, live a moral life, be kind to animals, replicate all the gifts and fruit of the Spirit, talk Christian talk, even become deacons, elders and pastors in churches. But what we can't see is their inner intentions. Most of the time we see other Christians in church on Sundays or during weeknight meetings when they put on their Christian appearance for the benefit of other Christians, but when they get home to their own families, and go to work, they put off their Christian appearance and behave just like anyone else in the world. Hypocrites can be angels at church among their Christian peers, but devils everywhere else where other Christians cannot see them.

For example, there are pedophile priests who are "saints" in front of the people, but perverted sexual abusers of young boys behind the scenes. My brother, when he was young, knew that one of the local Methodist youth worker was a stalker of young pre-teen girls and there was at least one event where he exposed himself to a group of young girls. When I was in the Air Force as an 18 year old, the officer in charge of our recruit training was a good looking outwardly successful officer, but unbenown to most of us, he was grooming some of our group for homosexual nooky. He was finally caught and it was a shock to us that at least four of our group came forward and testified against him that he made homosexual advances toward them. He kept the perverted side of him carefully hidden from the majority of us.

One of the elders of my 1970s Charismatic church appeared to be a very upright and faithful leader, until he was caught in a homosexual encounter in a local public toilet. Even though we had "seers" in our fellowship, no one knew what he was doing behind the scenes. So much for their spiritual "discernment". Not even his wife knew, and she was the closest to him.

Concerning tongues, I can be driving down the motorway praying in tongues under my breath, without anyone else in the car knowing. Because genuine tongues bubbles up from the spirit and one can speak it without making a single sound. Uninformed people wouldn't know that. I have been in a Charismatic church where many people were praying in tongues in support of people who went up for prayer at the end of the service, but I never heard any muttering at all.

But I can understand those whose worship of God is exclusively church-based, who believe that worship and praise to God doesn't happen outside of church services, or they sit like wooden Indians during their church services while the minister drones on from the front, and just spend time in their duty-bound "quiet time" at home spending five minutes praying their shopping list to God then not knowing what to say next and so they spend the rest of their "quiet-time" in a state of sleepy suspended animation until their 15 or 30 minutes is up and they have done their duty.

Actually, there are many more sleeping through boring sermons in cessationist churches than there are tongues speakers who disrupt Charismatic meetings.

 

[Serving Zion]

If you believe in "seers" who can see into the hearts of people, so be it.

It is not what I am describing, to "see" into the hearts, but just as 1 Corinthians 14:24-25 describes: the Word of God lays bare the very intention of the heart. This is why only the pure of heart can find rest in His presence and the rest must flee from the light into the cover of darkness - that is why they fall into deceit in our presence.

If you believe that people have a special gift to be able to distinguish between what is true and what is counterfeit, the best of British luck to you.

With an attitude like that, how can you ever hope to exercise the Christian faith? (1 John 4:1, 1 John 4:6).