Bible Study Tongues in the Old Testament.

[Hidden In Him]

This is common knowledge. Here's a random ling that I just googled. I skimmed it.
Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth
Everything that Charismatics and Pentecostal do today regarding tongues exactly emulates the mystery religions of that time.

Greetings Dave.

I do agree that there are problems associated with tongues and prophecy that go all the way back to New Testament times. I just wrote about it in a new study I published just now. But to throw all Pentecostalism under the bus as if they are all making the same mistakes is in error I think. It's the common problem I have with Cessationists. They often see only the bad and never the good.

Blessings,
- H

Read especially the section under "We Bear A Responsibility."

Thread 'Charismatic Bible Studies - 1 Peter 4:7-11'

Friday at 5:22 PM

Speaking As The Oracles Of God, The Responsibility Of Every Believer



Were the works of the Old Testament prophets just painting a picture from the past that we are no longer supposed to walk in, or should the great prophetic gifts of old still be in operation today? And is prophecy exclusively the domain of those who walk in the office of prophet, or was it a gift the entire church was called to walk in? Joel 2:28 suggests that the entire end-time church will continue to operate in them, and that from youngest to oldest they will all move in dreams, visions and...

• Hidden In Him
• Replies: 17
• Forum: Pentecostalism

• 

 

[Hopeful 2]

You certainly do. You are making the claim that those who don't speak in tongues aren't saved. That is a very serious claim that demands evidence, yet you continue to avoid providing any. But, we both know why, don't we? Because there isn't any. You are judging others as not being saved without any biblical basis for doing so, which is very sinful.

If they speak in tongues, and this unbeliever will believe the convert is indeed converted..

Well, you're in sin, so according to your own position you're not saved. Of course, according to what John is actually saying about those who claim to be sinless . . .

I am glad I walk in the light, so those verses that apply to those walking in sin don't apply to me.
Man cannot walk in sin, and God, at the same time.

1Co 14:21 In the Law it is written, “By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.”
1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. (ESV)

I am an unbeliever in the conversion of one who does not have the gift of tongues.

Verse 21 is a quote from Isa. 28:11, where God clearly states that he will speak to the Jews "by people of strange lips and with a foreign tongue." It is about judgement on his people.
Verse 22 connects to this with "Thus," that is, what he is about to say follows from what he just stated in verse 21. It also implies that the tongues being spoken of are those of human languages unknown to the speaker, as in Acts 2.

Feel free to confine the verses to Jews, or even to the Jews Isaiah was mentioning.
I will see them as a presage of these times, and another way to identify the posers who infiltrate the church by Christ Jesus (Eph 3:21)

Again, where is your evidence?
Except that, again, that is merely hyperbole and in no way whatsoever is Paul saying that he or anyone can speak in the tongues of angels.
Where does Paul say this is tongues? Where does Paul say that this is audibly spoken by the person praying?
Which is the only kind of tongues mentioned in the Bible and is consistent with Paul's use of it throughout 1 Cor. 12-14.
On the contrary:
1Co 14:1 Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.
1Co 14:3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.
...1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
...1Co 14:23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?
1Co 14:24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, (ESV)
First, Paul says that they should "earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially" that of prophecy. This implies that not all have the gift of prophecy. Second, we see in verse 24 what would happen if all in the church prophesied, which we know couldn't be the case since not all have the gift of prophecy. Third, in verse 5, Paul wants all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy.
It follows then that Paul is most likely implying that just as all do not have the gift of prophecy, not all have the gift of tongues, which goes right back to chapter 12 where he clearly states that not all have the gift of tongues. Additionally, he mentions that a person shouldn't speak in tongues if there is no one to interpret, which is another gift mentioned in chapter 12.
The whole flow is consistent from chapters 12 to 14. There is only one gift of tongues being spoken of--that of human languages.
Not hyperbole.
That isn't what is stated. You're reading into Scripture to suit your doctrine rather than letting it speak.
What does that have to do with anything? Nowhere does Paul say that any of these hyperbolic things lead to charity.
Which do you think given the context of this discussion?
Yes, they would, if they were taught your false doctrine, really a heresy, which is why it is so damaging--it can make people think they aren't saved, causing all sorts of needless angst and distress. It could lead someone to leave the faith.
Rightly understood, however, a Christian should know, from the passages I provided, that every believer has different gifts for their particular place in the body of Christ, and none should be jealous of another or feel left out.
They love others and they love and obey and Jesus. They also get convicted of their sins and continually repent, seeking God's forgiveness. Gifts do not prove that a person is converted. What does Jesus say?
Joh 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.

Joh 13:35 By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (ESV)

If Jesus' disciples are known for their love, whose disciples are known for their sin ?

You stated:
"I wonder if they feel they have been left out ?
They should.
Of course, a real repentance from sin, and water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins, will fix their exile from God."

You are now teaching at least two heresies on these forums, as seen in your comments above, which is why I said those comments are horrible. It has nothing to do with what Peter stated, but your twisting of Scripture and sinfully damning to hell those who are truly saved and hold to biblical truth.

I am just paraphrasing Peter in Acts 2:38..."Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
Are you saying that Peter was a heretic ?

You have to quit implying that obedience to God is against the will of God !

 

[Hopeful 2]

Hi Hope. Not like the day of Pentecost, but actually on the day of Pentecost.

Right.

That's the only time there was a miracle attached to languages.

Agreed.

What was happening at Corinth was a whole other ballgame.

Not exactly sure what you are referencing, but if it is not the languages-tongues, then it must be the tongues of angels-tongues.

I'll need to refer you back to the OPs, Hope.
Yes, see Romans 11:11-31. My bad, I've been saying Romans 9, Romans 11:11-31 is what I meant when referring to the grafting in of the gentiles.

I think you are over-reaching here.

Jesus baptized them with the Holy Spirit. That's the Promise of the Father (Holy Spirit NT indwellin) that was owed to them. That's what Pentecost was, the birth of the Church. The first "placed into" (baptized) into Christ Jesus.

I disagree, as it is water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins that "immerses" us into Christ. (Rom 6:3)

That's how a person is saved now and becomes "in Christ". Being "in Christ" before that wouldn't save a person.

Nobody could be in Christ, before they were baptized into Him, His death, His burial, and His resurrection.

There was no 'righteousness of God' established. There was no atonement made for sin yet. There was no death and resurrection for us to have the means to be born again with. All these things are given as a result of us being "in Christ" after the death resurrection, and ascension of Jesus.
Jesus chose them.
Pentecost.
Yes, Jesus is the Foundation. That foundation was available to be built upon starting at Pentecost when the first believers were placed into the Body, hence it is commonly known as the birth of the Church, which is what we call Pentecost.
That's what I said.
It told everyone that He was the true Messiah. Pentecost was an extension of that. The promise of the OT being fulfilled to usher in the NT. It told everyone a lot of things, like that the gentiles were included.
I'll need to refer you back to the OPs for an answer. It's all there.
Romans 11:11-31 again
This is common knowledge. Here's a random ling that I just googled. I skimmed it.

Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth

Everything that Charismatics and Pentecostal do today regarding tongues exactly emulates the mystery religions of that time.

I disagree.
The gift of tongues is a gift from God.
To categorize it as a worldly thing, is close to blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Dave...]

The apostles were speaking in other tongues as the spirit gave the utterance . The apostles had the Gift of speaking in tongues . The ones hearing the apostles DID NOT have a gift from the Holy Spirit , a gift of ears ! ? !

I understand completely what is being said about speaking in a language that is not you own by the power of the Holy Spirit because I do just that when the Holy Spirit gives the utterance .

Ok, I went over Acts 2 again, and vs. 6 does connect vs. 1-4 with 5-11. The sound like that of a rushing wind. So the speaking in languages that they didn't know, from the twelve, or the one-twenty, is what was being replied to in vs. 5-11 and after. I'll go on record saying that I believe that some things are still not adding up in that whole context. I still wonder if the hearing was not also part of it mainly because of the language used in vs. 6-11. Also, if the one twenty were speaking languages unknown to them, all at the same time, that would be problematic for many obvious reasons. The only way that I see that happening is if they broke off into little groups, but that idea doesn't seem to fit the description given in Acts two. With twelve, or potentially one hundred and twenty people speaking in different languages all at the same time, would only be confusing and hard for each of the listeners to hear their individual language. That problem is solved if the gift is in the hearing, either alone or in combination with the languages spoken. Just something to note for further study at another time.

What happened at Pentecost was miraculous, none the less. That's the main point that we all agree on. The sign, the giving of the Holy Spirit as promised in the OT, needed that confirmation that it was from God.

We know the true gift in the miraculous sense began at Pentecost (AD 33). And as Paul said In 1 Corinthians (AD 53-55), it will cease. But it's primary purpose as a sign of judgment on Israel didn't end until about AD 70.

It's important to point out that at Pentecost there was no gift of interpretation needed. I think that may be significant in comparing what happened at Acts to what happened in Corinth. While the true gift (the sign to unbelieving Israel) was being used, Paul, understanding that the sign was still being given, put a restriction of languages in such a way that only the true gift could obey his commands. This eliminated the mystery religion stuff at Corinth.

Dave

 

[Dave...]

Agreed.

Not exactly sure what you are referencing, but if it is not the languages-tongues, then it must be the tongues of angels-tongues.

Hope, you agreed that the only time that languages was miraculous was at Pentecost. Then when I stated that what was happening at Corinth was a whole other ballgame (meaning non miraculous), you disagreed. Basically you are disagreeing with yourself.

============

Hope said;

You are equating jealousy with judgement ?

Dave said: see Romans 11:11-31.

Where Paul gave the perfect answer to that question when He said;

I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them. For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? For if the first fruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in." Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy.

The passage I gave answered your objections directly and perfectly. And your reply was...

I think you are over-reaching here.

==============

I disagree, as it is water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins that "immerses" us into Christ. (Rom 6:3)

Romans 6:3-11 is speaking of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the Baptizer. The Holy Spirit is the agent of that baptism, not water. If you are not baptized with the Holy Spirit, you are not saved. That's Jesus placing the Holy Spirit in us. That places us in the Church, in Him. Pentecost began that. Also see Colossians 2:10-14, Galatians 3:26-27, and 1 Peter 3:21

Nobody could be in Christ, before they were baptized into Him, His death, His burial, and His resurrection.

That's what I said, right? Are you agreeing?

I disagree.
The gift of tongues is a gift from God.
To categorize it as a worldly thing, is close to blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.

Hope, it doesn't seem like you're putting much thought into your answers. What does this have to do with what I said?

Dave

 

[Dave...]

Greetings Dave.

I do agree that there are problems associated with tongues and prophecy that go all the way back to New Testament times. I just wrote about it in a new study I published just now. But to throw all Pentecostalism under the bus as if they are all making the same mistakes is in error I think. It's the common problem I have with Cessationists. They often see only the bad and never the good.

Blessings,
- H

Read especially the section under "We Bear A Responsibility."

Thread 'Charismatic Bible Studies - 1 Peter 4:7-11'

Friday at 5:22 PM

Speaking As The Oracles Of God, The Responsibility Of Every Believer



Were the works of the Old Testament prophets just painting a picture from the past that we are no longer supposed to walk in, or should the great prophetic gifts of old still be in operation today? And is prophecy exclusively the domain of those who walk in the office of prophet, or was it a gift the entire church was called to walk in? Joel 2:28 suggests that the entire end-time church will continue to operate in them, and that from youngest to oldest they will all move in dreams, visions and...

• Hidden In Him
• Replies: 17
• Forum: Pentecostalism

• 

Thanks H, I'll read it later tonight.

I think the worst thing that ever happened is that while all these modern translations of the Bible want to clarify Him as much as possible ('Him'...it didn't seem right to say 'it'), why they chose to continue to use the sixteenth century term 'tongues' instead of languages is baffling to me. We all know that the word tongues carries with it an idea that goes well beyond what languages means. It's a term that people hold onto for all the wrong reasons. I suppose that can be a double edged sword. You might be wondering why I'm mentioning this? The title of your article that you post for me took me immediately to Jeremiah 23 in my mind, from verses 16 to 40. Much emphasis on vs. 31. Please consider it carefully if you're claiming new revelation from God.

Read that passage here.

Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 23:16-40 - New King James Version

Thus says the Lord of hosts: “Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you. They make you worthless; They speak a vision of their own heart, Not from the mouth of the Lord. They continually say to those who despise Me, ‘The Lord has said, “You shall have peace” ’; And to...

www.biblegateway.com

vs.31

Jeremiah 23:31 - Compare Bible Verse Translations

Compare Bible translations of Jeremiah 23:31 using all available Bible versions and commentary. "Yes,” declares the LORD, “I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, ‘The LORD declares"

www.biblestudytools.com

I'll check out your article in a bit. It will give me something to dive into tonight. I'm looking forward to it.

Dave

 

[Hidden In Him]

I think the worst thing that ever happened is that while all these modern translations of the Bible want to clarify Him as much as possible ('Him'...it didn't seem right to say 'it'), why they chose to continue to use the sixteenth century term 'tongues' instead of languages is baffling to me. We all know that the word tongues carries with it an idea that goes well beyond what languages means.

Hmm... well, speaking for me personally, I think they chose the right word, at least if they had to choose only one and stick with it consistently. The translation "languages" would certainly fit in some places and eliminate ambiguity as you say. But there are places where it would make things more confusing. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 14 where it says, "when you come together, each one has.. a doctrine, has a language, has a revelation." That could be made out to say strange things. I mean, today we talk about everyone having their own "love language," LoL. And "forbid not to speak with languages" could simply be made to say "let anyone who is a foreigner speak in the church even if their home language is different from the native dialect," and then the term loses all connection to the supernatural gifts. By sticking with the term "tongues," one keeps the supernatural connotations intact so that it doesn't drift from the church's consciousness altogether.

Please consider it carefully if you're claiming new revelation from God.

So you understand Dave, I'm not really claiming new revelation. My studies are always based soundly on the written word of God. I'm more educated in it than I let on, and would prefer discussing it with others on a more scholarly level, only you lose people like that. But I'm very into Biblical exegesis.

But I do believe very strongly that dreams, visions and prophecy will be given to the church in the end-times for the sake of protecting us from spiritual attack, among other things. Read through the last section on "We Have A Responsibility" and you will understand better. By "prophecy," I don't mean Biblical prophecy that adds to the books of Daniel, Revelation, Isaiah, etc. I mean prophecies uttered over people's lives that are the Lord speaking directly into a situation that involves them. It's more small-scale than what you see in the prophecies of Daniel or Isaiah. And that's not to say that no modern prophecies are ever large scale, but simply that somehow "adding to scripture" never comes to mind. We don't think like that. It's more of an argument that took hold amongst Cessationists thinking that if God has spoken then it should be recorded in a book and cherished for many generations until the Lord comes, but as the scripture says, there were many things that Christ did and said which were not recorded for us, and that if they were they would take up many volumes. Yet the Lord chose not to record them for us. But He did not neglect to speak them, nonetheless, just like the scripture commands not to forbid prophesying.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Hope, you agreed that the only time that languages was miraculous was at Pentecost. Then when I stated that what was happening at Corinth was a whole other ballgame (meaning non miraculous), you disagreed. Basically you are disagreeing with yourself.

No, I agreed that the only time "foreign language"-tongues occurred, was at Pentecost.
Though it may have happened elsewhere but not written about.

Hope said;
Dave said: see Romans 11:11-31.
Where Paul gave the perfect answer to that question when He said;
The passage I gave answered your objections directly and perfectly. And your reply was...

That doesn't explain your assertion that the gift of tongues was some sort of judgement of Israel.

Romans 6:3-11 is speaking of the baptism with the Holy Spirit.

I disagree, as water baptism is the only kind that emulates the "buried with Him" of Rom 6:4, and the "planted" of Rom 6:5.

Jesus is the Baptizer. The Holy Spirit is the agent of that baptism, not water.

I disagree completely.

If you are not baptized with the Holy Spirit, you are not saved. That's Jesus placing the Holy Spirit in us.

Agreed, but where/when were your sins remitted ?

That places us in the Church,

That I agree with.

in Him. Pentecost began that. Also see Colossians 2:10-14, Galatians 3:26-27, and 1 Peter 3:21

I disagree.

That's what I said, right? Are you agreeing?

Nope.
I will be more careful to indicate whether or not I am referring to water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins, or, Spirit baptism, in the future.

Hope, it doesn't seem like you're putting much thought into your answers. What does this have to do with what I said?

Perhaps you should reread my answer ?

Peter said, in Acts 2:38..."Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
If one turns from sin, and is water baptized, they will receive the Spirt baptism.
Man does the first, and God does the second.

 

[hawkman]

Also, if the one twenty were speaking languages unknown to them, all at the same time, that would be problematic for many obvious reasons.

Do you see any mentions of problems in the second chapter of Acts ?

With twelve, or potentially one hundred and twenty people speaking in different languages all at the same time, would only be confusing and hard for each of the listeners to hear their individual language.

A bible verse to support your idea of problems at the out pouring of the Holy Spirit ?

That problem is solved if the gift is in the hearing, either alone or in combination with the languages spoken.

A gift of tongues not a gift of ears .

And as Paul said In 1 Corinthians (AD 53-55), it will cease.

The condition has not been met . So obviously all the gifts are still here and active .

 

[Dave...]

Hmm... well, speaking for me personally, I think they chose the right word, at least if they had to choose only one and stick with it consistently. The translation "languages" would certainly fit in some places and eliminate ambiguity as you say. But there are places where it would make things more confusing. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 14 where it says, "when you come together, each one has.. a doctrine, has a language, has a revelation." That could be made out to say strange things. I mean, today we talk about everyone having their own "love language," LoL. And "forbid not to speak with languages" could simply be made to say "let anyone who is a foreigner speak in the church even if their home language is different from the native dialect," and then the term loses all connection to the supernatural gifts. By sticking with the term "tongues," one keeps the supernatural connotations intact so that it doesn't drift from the church's consciousness altogether.

See the emboldened part (By me) in your quote: Hidden, this is exactly what I was talking about. The term "tongues" has nothing to do with the supernatural. It's a sixteenth century term that was common back then for the word 'languages'. It was used in the original KJV that was published in 1611. The term 'tongues' doesn't have a supernatural connotation attached to it. It simply means languages. It's the context that will give it the supernatural. If that context isn't there, we should leave it at languages with no connotations attached. It's the Charismatic and Pentecostals who have attached that supernatural connotation to the word, and didn't define it by the context. This is why I said it baffles me that the translators removed all the sixteenth century dialect in the modern translations, but left the word languages as tongues. This is how error enters translations. Just translate it as is and the Holy Spirit will do the rest. Look at all the error and confusion that it caused.

So you understand Dave, I'm not really claiming new revelation. My studies are always based soundly on the written word of God. I'm more educated in it than I let on, and would prefer discussing it with others on a more scholarly level, only you lose people like that. But I'm very into Biblical exegesis.

When applied to tongues, it usually takes on a another meaning in your circles, especially when attacked to prophecy. So, I'm glad that you see the Oracles of God, like in 1 Peter 4:11, was speaking of God's written Word, like in Hebrews 5:12-13. And that in that same passage in first Peter, he was speaking of "as speaking" the oracles. In other words, when you speak, speak as if you are speaking the Word of God. Philippians 3:15-17 says the same thing. Colossians 3:17 and 1 Corinthians 2:12-16 can also apply. While these things are from the Spirit, these are the "Teacher" part of the Holy Spirit in action that all believers have and personally operate by this every day. Whether the Holy Spirit convicts us, or opens our eyes to Biblical truth, or even puts a desire in our heart, we should test all these things to the Word of God. I just get very cautious when I hear certain words from certain circles based on my history with them, that's all.

But I do believe very strongly that dreams, visions and prophecy will be given to the church in the end-times for the sake of protecting us from spiritual attack, among other things. Read through the last section on "We Have A Responsibility" and you will understand better. By "prophecy," I don't mean Biblical prophecy that adds to the books of Daniel, Revelation, Isaiah, etc. I mean prophecies uttered over people's lives that are the Lord speaking directly into a situation that involves them. It's more small-scale than what you see in the prophecies of Daniel or Isaiah. And that's not to say that no modern prophecies are ever large scale, but simply that somehow "adding to scripture" never comes to mind. We don't think like that. It's more of an argument that took hold amongst Cessationists thinking that if God has spoken then it should be recorded in a book and cherished for many generations until the Lord comes, but as the scripture says, there were many things that Christ did and said which were not recorded for us, and that if they were they would take up many volumes. Yet the Lord chose not to record them for us. But He did not neglect to speak them, nonetheless, just like the scripture commands not to forbid prophesying.

But Jesus was confirmed to be who He said He was. That's why everything has to be tested to the Word of God Thess. 5:21, which is complete for testing these things. It's one thing to say, the Lord has put it on my heart, or, the Lord has said, and quote scripture. But if we say, the Lord told me to tell you, that's different. That's new revelation prophecy.


Dave

 

[Hidden In Him]

The term "tongues" has nothing to do with the supernatural.

Incorrect.

So, I'm glad that you see the Oracles of God, like in 1 Peter 4:11, was speaking of God's written Word, like in Hebrews 5:12-13.

Dave, you did not comprehend me. That is the exact opposite of what I was saying.

But Jesus was confirmed to be who He said He was. That's why everything has to be tested to the Word of God Thess. 5:21, which is complete for testing these things. It's one thing to say, the Lord has put it on my heart, or, the Lord has said, and quote scripture. But if we say, the Lord told me to tell you, that's different. That's new revelation prophecy.

Dave, no offense, but this is precisely why I rarely discuss things with Cessationists. They neither comprehend me, nor do they attempt to, and as a result we bear very little in common.

Blessings in Christ.
Hidden In Him

 

[Dave...]

Do you see any mentions of problems in the second chapter of Acts ?

Which would indicate that something supernatural was also happening with their hearing, right?

A bible verse to support your idea of problems at the out pouring of the Holy Spirit.

See my answer to your first question.

A gift of tongues not a gift of ears .

I'm only suggesting it as a possibility in addition to the miraculous sign of languages being given on that day.

Question. Why did the Corinthians need the gift of interpretation, when at Pentecost they didn't ? Yet you claim it's the same gift?

The condition has not been met . So obviously all the gifts are still here and active .

AD 70. The condition had been met for the sign of Judgment on unbelieving Israel, as I have shown. We can start a thread on the perfect if you like.

 

[Dave...]

Hope, this is for you.

"a. The Ecstasy of the Greco-Roman World

At the time of the Corinthian church, the Greco-Roman world had a multitude of gods. In their worship of these gods, it was very common for a person to go into ecstasy, which literally means "to go out of oneself." They would go into an unconscious state where all kinds of psychic phenomena would occur. They believed that when they were in an ecstatic trance, they actually left their body, ascended into space, connected up to whatever deity they were worshiping, and would begin to commune with that deity. Once they began to commune with that deity, they would begin to speak the language of the gods. This was a very common practice in their culture. In fact, the term used in 1 Corinthians to refer to speaking in tongues (glossais lalein) was not invented by Bible writers. It was a term used commonly in the Greco-Roman culture to speak of the pagan language of the gods which occurred while the speaker was in an ecstatic trance. By the way, this language of the gods was always gibberish.

b. The Eros of the Greek World

The Greeks had a word for this ecstatic religious experience. It was the word eros. Sometimes translated as sensual love, the word eros had a broader meaning. It meant "the desire for the sensual," or "the desire for the erotic," or "the desire for ecstasy," or "the desire for the ultimate experience or feeling." Their religion, then, was an erotic, sensual, ecstatic religion-- designed to be felt. In fact, when people went to their various temples to worship, they would actually enter into orgies with the temple priestesses. So the erotic, sexual, sensual, ecstatic religion was all rolled into one big ball along with the gibberish of divine utterances. And these mystery religions, which had been spawned in Babylon, had found their way into the Corinthian society...and the church.


THE INFILTRATION OF CORINTH INTO THE CHURCH

The Corinthian church had allowed the entire world system in which they existed to infiltrate their assembly. For example, they were emphasizing human philosophies (chapters 1-4), they had a hero worship cult (chapter 3), they were involved in terrible, gross, sexual immorality (chapters 5-6), they were suing each other in court (chapter 6), they had misevaluated their home and marriage relationships (chapter 7), they were confused about pagan feasts, idolatry, and things offered to idols (chapters 8-10), they had relinquished the proper place of women in the church (chapter 11), they had misunderstood the whole dimension of spiritual gifts (chapter 12), and they had lost hold of the one great thing--love (chapter 13).

You see, they had let the satanic system that existed in their society infiltrate the church. And with it came the pagan religious practices--with all of the ecstasies, eroticisms, and sensualities. The Corinthians accepted it all, creating a confused amalgamation of truth and error." Macarthur

 

[Dave...]

Dave, no offense, but this is precisely why I rarely discuss things with Cessationists. They neither comprehend me, nor do they attempt to, and as a result we bear very little in common.

Welcome to my world.

To me it sounds like your basically saying it's not that kind of revelation, but it's this kind of revelation. And this kind of revelation doesn't need to be added to the Bible. I'm having trouble making the distinction. In my eyes, both are the same. Help me to understand the how one is not new revelation. Why don't you think the latter should be added to the Bible?

Also, "as speaking the Oracles of God" carries a different meaning saying 'speaking the Oracles of God'. Do you agree? And Speaking the Oracles of God can be new revelation, but is mostly not new revelation. It just means the Word of God. In other words, the already revealed Word of God. Do you agree?

Dave

 

[hawkman]

Which would indicate that something supernatural was also happening with their hearing, right?

This is not an answer it is a question .

See my answer to your first question.

I don't see a bible verse from Acts 2 that mentions any problems with the gift of Tongues . That was what I asked for since you think there was a problem . I see you have no verse to offer .

I'm only suggesting it as a possibility in addition to the miraculous sign of languages being given on that day.

I don't see any bible verse in the Acts 2 that makes you suggesting a possibility tenable at all , but here you are anyway .

Question. Why did the Corinthians need the gift of interpretation, when at Pentecost they didn't ? Yet you claim it's the same gift?

The gift of tongues , yes the same gift . Sometimes an interpretation is needed and sometimes not , that is not hard to grasp is it ?

AD 70. The condition had been met for the sign of Judgment on unbelieving Israel, as I have shown. We can start a thread on the perfect if you like.

If I can not get you to understand that it is a gift of tongues instead of a gift of ears we may just talk in big circles , but I can .

 

[Dave...]

The gift of tongues , yes the same gift . Sometimes an interpretation is needed and sometimes not , that is not hard to grasp is it ?

Yes, please explain it for me. Why didn't the gift of languages need interpreted at Pentecost, when it did in Corinth? At Pentecost, each heard the others who were speaking in languages, speak in their own language. In Corinth, each did not hear the others who were speaking in languages, speak in their own language. That's why they needed an interpreter. One heard, one did not. That not what I say, that's what the Scripture says. So yes, I would like to know why one need an interpreter, and the other didn't.

If I can not get you to understand that it is a gift of tongues instead of a gift of ears we may just talk in big circles , but I can .

Hawk, for clarity, I'm not saying that the possibility of a miracle of understanding the different languages at Pentecost is in place of the gift of the speaking different languages at Pentecost. But rather, that the possibility of a miracle of understanding the different languages at Pentecost was in addition to the gift of the speaking different languages at Pentecost. So it would be beneficial for this discussion that we lay the either-or idea down. Nobody is claiming that.