Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Speaking In Tongues - What Does The Bible Say About Them?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
What would happen if the Baptist church today said, "For too long we have lived loving Father, Son, and Holy Scripture. We want to know and understand more of the work of the Holy Spirit. We what to live in all fullness of life, whatever that looks like, and we will rely on you to lead us there." I honestly do not think 10 people would fall out slain in the Spirit. That's just not the God of the Bible. But you might have some godly person speak up and say something like, "I really feel like the Spirit is saying he is pleased with our desire to be grown."


One might be tempted to agree with your logical and calm approach brother Dwayne, but we are left to the scriptures as our guide. One, the Holy Spirit will not work outside of the scriptures or their clear implications, two, he will not give witness to himself. That said, if we desire to "know and understand more of work of the Holy Spirit," we must go to the scriptures, and the scriptures alone in order to do that. How we feel, what we may desire, why we believe we might need... all that is so seeker sensitive, experience based, and therefore biased and subjective to human factors not scriptural.

Brother Harrison has presented a clear case for the cessation of tongues, be they the modern understanding of them or be they the biblical presentation of them.

The only thing left at this point is to say Amen, thus saith the Lord... or.... continue looking for experience based interpretations of the Bible.

To live in the fullness of the Holy Spirit? Just what does that mean? Just what does that "look like"? That is the concern I have. Making my experience or feelings the basis for truth in place of the one solid and unchanging basis we have been given. The Bible.

Dwayne, how do you know that you are not at this minute "filled with the Spirit"? (I use that phrase in the germane sense) Would you or I know whether or not we could sense a greater feeling or closeness? Can we trust what we might be feeling at the moment, or what if we are down in the dumps today, does that make me less filled?
I for one have a hard time with that sort of thing, not because I am afraid to feel anything, but more so due to the fact that when I read the early Acts period and the phrases that equate to "filled with the Spirit", most times if not all of them there is a definite demonstration of the working of the Holy Spirit, that is, speaking with boldness. My reading of the book of Acts indicates that preaching, witnessing, and not experience, or sensations of "feeling good" or "overwhelmed with joy" is a result of being filled by the or with the Holy Spirit.

In my personal life I can testify that the few times where I might have been "filled" I was also immediately charged with a self loathing, a helplessness, a dependence upon the grace of the Lord. A serious conviction of and about my true self, the judgment I truly deserve and the sense of a ... well it's hard to describe. I believe that is more in line with what the scriptures say a real meeting of the Spirit and a man will produce. (John 16)

God bless,

Calvary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Excellent points Calvary.... reminds me of those brothers and sisters we know who (despite a great lack of scripture study or reading) seem ever led to do or say such an such which we find almost invariably in stark opposition to scripture. I know one dear lady named Lisa for point of illustration, who admitted she read very little of the Bible since getting saved. Yet she was always sharing with me at work what she was "led" to do or say "by the Holy Spirit" in counseling friends and fellow church members. With few exceptions I found her advice directly opposed the Bible! pro-abortion, pro-divorce, pro-sodomite union etc.

Of course this makes us "legalists" lol they say! Just stodgy old legalists who don't want anyone to be "moved" by the "spirit" :) One thing is for sure.... Bible thumping, non-modernized, non-charismatic, old fashioned "just believe the Bible" Baptists are in the back of the bus (or maybe even the luggage compartment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say to this is that, as a former RCC---this always spooked me. I have many Christian friends who were in the RCC (like myself) and are VERY afraid of "Speaking in Tongues."

:hijack: PastorHarrison---I have heard that the movie "The Exorcist" was taken from the teachings in the Byzantine Catholic Church. Do you, or anyone else know if that is correct? I am curious on that one. :wvlf"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"slain in the Spirit"

Isn't that the expression used by Benny Hinn and those who teach as he does? Seems to ma much of their teachings are finding their way into the modern day Baptist circles.

Also, does not to many try to use their human logic, worldly reasoning, to determine the truth of the Holy Word?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
All I can say to this is that, as a former RCC---this always spooked me. I have many Christian friends who were in the RCC (like myself) and are VERY afraid of "Speaking in Tongues."

:hijack: PastorHarrison---I have heard that the movie "The Exorcist" was taken from the teachings in the Byzantine Catholic Church. Do you, or anyone else know if that is correct? I am curious on that one. :wvlf"


I am afraid this country preacher can't even spell Byzantine... :puzzled: and would have to admit.... not a clue as to the Catholic origins of the movie you mentioned.... :duh
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I am afraid this country preacher can't even spell Byzantine... :puzzled: and would have to admit.... not a clue as to the Catholic origins of the movie you mentioned.... :duh



I will do a search PastorHarrison. Ya---gotta love those "country preachers." :thumb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"slain in the Spirit"

Isn't that the expression used by Benny Hinn and those who teach as he does? Seems to ma much of their teachings are finding their way into the modern day Baptist circles.

Also, does not to many try to use their human logic, worldly reasoning, to determine the truth of the Holy Word?



Yes---Pastor Jerry. "Slain in the Spirit" has taken off with Benny Hinn and others(in this generation)---which is sad.

It isn't a newly invented thing, though---as you are well aware. :-)


Also, does not to many try to use their human logic, worldly reasoning, to determine the truth of the Holy Word?


YES!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I would like to go point by point if you don't mind. There is a lot here, and I do not want to miss anything.

I agree that scripture is our guide. I also believe that the case scripture makes of the active work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer is a LOT stronger then the one that says these particular gifts are ceased. So my position is not one of putting self-action above scripture, quite the opposite. Let me make another statement that often does not sit well. The Scripture is not the only revelation made to man. Now before I'm hung, I want to qualify that statement. The Holy Spirit guides and directs us as we grow in Christ likeness. He reveals truth in scripture and he convicts of sin. Now not every sin is specifically stated in scripture, yet we rely on the Holy Spirit's conviction to "tell" or reveal to us when we have done wrong. Conviction is one way the Holy Spirit "reveals" things to us. Its one we are comfortable with. There are, detailed in scripture, other ways He reveals things to his followers. Now any "revelation" to us either by conviction or other, is always to be interpreted through scripture. Only Scripture is authoritative. If we are convicted of spending time in prayer instead of doing the laundry, lets say, well we could look to scripture and find that that conviction does not fit with scripture (Mary and Martha for example) and we can determine whether that conviction is of God or not. The same is true of say a prophetic word. Does that exhortation jive with scripture? etc.

So I agree that the only completely authoritative source is scripture, but that does not negate the work of the Holy Spirit. It only justifies a level of carefulness over it. We "test the spirits" as they say. That is always done through scripture.

I disagree that cessation is clearly presented in scripture. There is a third option here. Trying to keep it clear, I would re-word you statement to looking to clarify our experiences through the Bible. That probably doesn't do it justice. There is a two fold process here. First is clearly defining whether gifts have ceased. I do not see the scriptural support for that at all. So lets assume that the first step does NOT remove the ability of God to work through these gifts. Then, when those gifts are used, they can be tested to know if they are of God or not. I am not sure who said fullness of the spirit. I know I said fullness of life because that is what Scripture calls us to. I define that as being in the absolute closest fellowship with God that I can be in my fallen state. What that looks like is modeled in Scripture, but not very clearly defined. And those models vary. I am led to believe that it looks a little different for everyone, but we know the broad strokes (care, compassion, honesty, integrety, love, commitment, etc).
Again, filled in the spirit is a poor term, but I know what your asking. Can I be down in the dumps while I am led by the Spirit. I don't think so. Do I have all the Spirit I will ever get, YES! But to I always let Him Reign in every aspect of my life... unfortunately no.

Its interesting you say this. Last Sunday night, my pastor was giving the benediction prayer. Something happened. I had lunch with him yesterday, and we discussed it. His words went something like, "As I was praying, I realized that something was happening, like God was speaking, so I went with it. When I finished, I sat down, and realized, I have no clue what I just said." Afterwards many people came up and one person mentioned that if all they had heard tonight was his prayer that would have been worth it.

Now I am saying this type of thing is a working of the Holy Spirit. His prayer was completely biblically based. There was nothing heretical in it. It was not designed to build him up or give him joy etc., it was designed to encourage and challenge the Body of Christ. Why would we not attribute that to the work of the Holy Spirit?

I will also say that while spiritual gifts are often used corporately to encourage or rebuke the church, or testify to the lost person, that also does not negate that those gift can be used personally. Again, not because I say so, but becuase scripture talks of them being used as such. We should not fear misuse so much that we reject it completely.

Again, I agree that conviction is one way teh Holy Spirit deals with us, but why do we limit him to only that when scripture doesn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I want to add... I do not speak in tongues. I never have. I believe it is possible for the Holy Spirit to work that way, but He never has with me. I have, once, had what I believe was a very clear exhortation for our church. In our church, we do everything we can to be open to that. The standing rule is that there are pastor's and elders available, and if someone has something they feel needs to be said, they tell those leaders, the leaders test it against scripture. If they agree, then either they will relay that to the church or the person can. This classifies as "prophetic" exhortation. I have never seen anyone speak in tongues at our church. I think the reason it does not happen is because Lost people don't really come to church in America. So I am not sure how much value there would be for the Spirit to work that way (that is just IMHO).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[offtopic]We are just wonderful' date=' thanks for asking. I felt the baby kick for the first time two days ago. It was pretty special![/offtopic']



:hijack: That is so awesome dwayner!! I remembered the first time that happened to me. Yes...it is "pretty special!" :smile
God bless you and yours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say to this is that, as a former RCC---this always spooked me. I have many Christian friends who were in the RCC (like myself) and are VERY afraid of "Speaking in Tongues."

:hijack: PastorHarrison---I have heard that the movie "The Exorcist" was taken from the teachings in the Byzantine Catholic Church. Do you, or anyone else know if that is correct? I am curious on that one. :wvlf"



The first article (of course) I have is from Wikipedia. :smile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorcism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exorcismjesus-liberator-orozco27.jpg (24179 bytes)



Exorcism is the act of driving out, or warding off, demons, or evil spirits, from persons, places, or things, which are believed to be possessed or infested by them, or are liable to become victims or instruments of their malice.

Technically, exorcism is not driving out a the Devil or demon, but it is placing the Devil or demon on oath. And, in some incidences there may be more than one demon possessing a person. "Exorcism" is derived from the Greek preposition "ek" with the verb "horkizo" which means "I cause [someone] to swear" and refers to "putting the spirit or demon on oath," or invoking a higher authority to bind the entity in order to control it and command it to act contrary to its own will.

The rite is mainly thought to be practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, but some Orthodox and Protestant denominations such as the Pentecostals and other charismatic groups practice it as well. These groups refer to the practice as "deliverance ministry" where gifted people drive out devils and heal while they touch the persons with their hands, called laying on of hands, and pray over them. Exorcism (Greek Orthodox)
The Official Exorcism in the Catholic Church can be done only by a special priest, duly authorized by the Bishop of the Dioceses.

There are also Exorcisms among the Jewish religion, examples of which may be seen in Talmud (Schabbath, xiv, 3; Aboda Zara, xii, 2; Sanhedrin, x, 1)... and exorcisms in other religions, as in the Babylonian and Egyptian cultures.
Jews and Demons Exorcism by Rabbis (with information on Talmud Sages and their magic).

In the Catholic Church there are three kind of Exorcisms:

1- Exorcism of the possessed:
A simple and authoritative adjuration addressed to the demon in the name of God and more especially in the name of Jesus Christ crucified, is the usual form of exorcism... But sometimes in addition to words some symbolic action is employed, such as breathing (insufflatio), or laying of hands on the subject, or making the sign of the cross

2- Baptismal exorcism
At an early age the practice was introduced into the Church of exorcising catechumens as a preparation for the Sacrament of Baptism... now it is usually done during the baptismal ceremony.

3- Other Exorcisms
Places and things as well as persons are naturally liable to diabolical infestation, and exorcism in regard to them is nothing more that a prayer to God, in the name of His Church, to restrain this diabolical power supernaturally, and a profession of faith in His willingness to do so on behalf of His servants on earth.

Exorcism--The Facts (as viewed in the Catholic Church)

A simple Exorcism: For Catholic Priests or Layman

The Catholic Prayer of Exorcism (in Latin and English) The Roman Ritual of Exorcism
Exorcism - The Roman Ritual (2) - The Rite for Exorcism On the Current Norms Governing Exorcisms (CDF)
Vatican issues first new Exorcism Ritual since 1614

Real Audio Sound Byte of Deliverance How to Stop a Demonic Attack



There are three kinds of demonic influence:

The Exorcism is mainly used in the third kind: Possession.

1- Temptation: For everybody, including Jesus when he was fasting and praying for 40 days!? you and your friends will also be tempted, specially when you pray and fast long, like Jesus. (Mt.4).

2- Obsession, compulsion, oppression They are very frequent, causing the impulse to masturbation, stealing, lying, hitting the relatives, homosexuality, alcohol, drugs, irrational compulsions, depressions? Here the person may have an irresistible impulse to perform something he well knows it is wrong or irrational, or an anxious and inescapable preoccupation with an idea or emotion that he realizes it is not right? in contrast with the demonic possession, here the person can exercise volition, he is capable of voluntary actions, and he realizes he is doing something bad or wrong.

3- Demonic Possession: A demon takes over the personality of a human, so that he is incapable of voluntary thinking or actions: Most heretics, those involved in the occult? Here the person is even unable to recognize that he may be wrong? at times, the individual normal personality is replaced by another, specially while talking about a specific subject: He is fine, except when you touch that special subject? other times, not often, he may manifest bizarre symptoms, such as hysteric behavior, incoherent speech, uncontrollable physical movements, with extraordinary feats o physical strength that may be self-destructive or destructive to others or to material objects?

In all instances, it has to considered that the symptoms or actions may be due to pathological (natural) factors rather than by the supernatural power of evil spirits.

Official Church exorcisms are rare, and mainly on these kind of Demonic Possession, but those which are performed are usually administered by priests who are special delegates of their local bishops, always after a very rigorous physical and psychological examination that rules out any natural explanation for the problems. And since 1972, the official Church declared that the minor order of exorcist would not longer be received.



Catholic Encyclopedia Exorcism (How to Stop a Demonic Attack, Protection) Exorcism Exorcism... Ask


Here is an article. I thought I had heard (once or twice) that Exorcisms became popular as a result of the Byzantine Catholic Church.

Yes...everything goes back to the OT. The Book of Ecclesiastes is proof of that one.

Ecclesiastes 1:9...The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. KJV 1611 AV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Brother John said "Act 8:13 And Simon also himself believed: and being baptized, he continued with Philip; and beholding signs and great miracles wrought, he was amazed.

Here is a situation of signs being used to win the Gentiles. Also the Church at Corinth used sign gifts 1 Cor 14, deal with their used of speaking in tongues.

Hi Bro John, the Lord bless you. Saw your post! Nice to meet you. Here are some things for you to ponder concerning Simon the sorcerer.

1. Simon is a Samaritan (mixed bloodline Israelite / Ishmaelite - not categorically gentile) in Acts 8 (four years) prior to the gospel being given to the gentiles (Acts 10).
2. Simon believes signs being performed by whom? Phillip (a Jew) for whom? Jews (Acts 8:12) so Simon saw what? Jews performing signs to the Jews and he himself as a Samaritan (vs 14) also believed these Jewish Apostles (only) vs 18 and their signs which he "saw".
3. The gentiles are not who the Apostles were trying to convert in Acts 8. Remember they didn't even believe a gentile could be saved at this point in Bible history, and were ready to trounce Peter for preaching to gentiles in Acts 10. So much so that Peter feared what would happen to him when the Jews of Jerusalem heard he had preached to gentiles and so he rehearsed how he was going to tell them...and he took Jewish witnesses with him as backup (Acts 11:2) to verify his story. So the gentiles who did speak in tongues did so for one purpose....to prove to Jews who didn't think they could be saved, that yes now in Acts 10 salvation had come to the gentiles (Acts 11:18) have now been allowed to accept and believe the gospel!

Summary: Acts 8 is pre-gentile salvation. The gentile is not the intended audience. Simon believes Jewish signs, performed exclusively by Jewish Apostles and he was thereby convinced of the reality of the gospel by this manifestation of signs yet when he believes, he DOES NOT speak in tongues nor perform ANY sign himself as evidence of conversion, nor at any point recorded thereafter.

Lastly - you mentioned Gentiles in Corinth - yes, of a certainty there were gentiles in the church at Corinth... a church started by a Jew, filled with Jews (and gentiles) and wherein signs were performed to win Jews who had not yet believed.

I could write you a book on it if needed, but suffice it to say Jews returning to their homeland, speaking the language of where they may have been born abroad, upon entering the church at the seaport city of Corinth, would be able to hear the gospel of Christ Jesus spoken in thier own tongue as a manifest token of its powerful truth through a gift of the Holy Spirit to a Jew or a gentile at that time for the purpose of convincing Jews only of the truth of the gospel.
*One point to consider though. No gentile is recorded as speaking in tongues outside Acts 10 and then only for the purpose of convincing Jews that salvation (not tongues or signs) had come to the gentile. It is only assumed that gentiles spoke in tongues routinely in the Corinthian church.

Hope that helps a little.

In Christ
Bro Malcolm


You can play semantics with words. Yes the Samartians were half bread of Jewish descent, but that does not prove only the sing gifts were used with reference to the Jews. Paul in Corinthians does not distinguish between Jew and Gentile since there were both in the church He is talking to the church as a whole as he deals with tongues, which was a sign gift.

God bless
John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Hi Brother Kevin, Let me see if I can respond to your concerns and questions / comments: I'll try to go in order numerically to keep it somewhat organized.
1. "Buzz words": "thats not in the Bible" - yes, you're right "sign" gifts as a term isn't in the Bible, neither is the word "Korea" or "youth pastor" or "sunday school" or "Pauline epistles" but these terms do have substance and meaning nontheless sound.

Why are they sound? Because you say they are? Because that's what you were taught? This is faulty reasoning. You are basically adding to the Bible and using the excuse that "'youth pastor' or 'Korea' isn't in the Bible either." Does that mean I can say that the Bible says that we are supposed to eat chocolate every day and, if you challenge it, tell you that the Bible doesn't mention "Baptist churches" either instead of presenting Scripture to back up my belief? You can tell me it's sound all day but until you have something to back it up with in Scripture, it's meaningless.

2. That this word was created by men to "do away with a gift" I'd disagree with that assessment. Baptist doctrine doesn't "do away with" tongues. That is impossible and violates scripture. What we do is accept what the Bible says about what exactly they really were as opposed to what is claimed by the many who join Elymas in "perverting the right ways of the Lord" and who ever struggle to subtly "pervert the gospel of Christ" (See Acts 13:10 and Gal 1:7).

Baptists are so careful not to be led into something unBiblical, that they would go to extra-Biblical lengths to eliminate something that can be over or improperly used. There isn't any Scripture to indicate they have ceased.

3. "What you have is this verse (ref 1 Cor 14:22) from which people get it" -- Scripture 'with' scripture must include as well to whom the signs were given friend Kevin. Ref 1 Cor 1:22 the Jews seek a sign. I need not call to your attention that the signs (you will accept that the term signs is Biblical?) begin with Moses (a jew) and are given to the children of Israel (Jews) to prove something (a Biblical truth) to them? Moreover that throughout Scripture no sign (or tongues) ever occurs outside their presence. It is said plainly in scripture tongues are for a sign and who is it that the Bible says seeks signs? The Jews.

And yet, you still don't have any Scripture to indicate that anything outside of tongues were a sign. Sure, that is what has come to be accepted by many in Christianity, but the Bible only ever says that tongues are for a sign. In addition, while you are emphasizing that all signs are for the Jews, why did you pass over the last part of that verse? "but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." This verse couldn't be more clear that prophesying is for believers. Indeed, we see Christians having visions multiple times in the book of Acts that didn't involve an unsaved person.

4. If indeed the Bible says tongues are for them that don't believe (and it does) isn't it odd that only believers argue it's reality in our time and not unbelievers who got saved under it's application and use? How very strange.... I attended a tongue faking church for many years....same good redneck country folk every service speaking chicken language to impress one another....never a soul saved who otherwise didnt understand the gospel but through tongues heard and believed....how very odd.

You're basing your understanding of tongues on what you experienced in a church that misused and, like you said, most likely faked it. I think we should be careful not to let our human reactions affect our beliefs about Scripture. Some fundamentalist Baptists are hateful, bitter people. Does that mean that I should say that all Baptists are unScriptural and should be rejected?

5. Your premise that miracles and prophesyings are not signs is incorrect - these are demonstrable "signs" and as such never occur outside the presence of Jews. They are acts of power demonstration which convince one to believe without faith...rather than by faith to beleive and then see the manifestations of power.

Chapter and verse.

6. You said Not all signs are supernatural. I would disagree and say any gift of God is quite wonderful & supernatural! What ever ones gift of God - be it helps, teaching, wisdom.... it is a supernatural empowering of the Holy Spirit and wonderfully wrought in the believer!

Yes, I agree. My point was, not every gift is supernatural by our interpretation. We tend to like to throw out anything that is too weird or unusual for us in favor of what makes sense.

7. You say "we rationalize away manifest showings of the Holy Ghost...." Sound doctrine disagrees. Having never seen the pillar of fire for example doesn't mean it didn't exist. It does however follow the instruction to study and rightly divide to know to whom, when, how this wonder was given. The pillar of fire was real, did occur, for a specific time, for a specific people, for a specific purpose. Others beheld it, but it was not for them....and it's time is ended. Is that rationalizing away the pillar of fire? I guess some might say yes.....your just being "logical". In the end the pillar of fire, certainly a manifest working of power of the Holy Spirit, is no longer with us.... that doesn't mean I don't believe it 'once was' with us.

You're talking apples and oranges. Just because it's easy to say that the pillar of fire no longer exists for us today, doesn't give anyone a basis to tie it into tongues. That's the job of clever seminary teachers who like to make grand extra-Biblical analogies to make their own pet doctrines look good.


Also, :goodpost::goodpost: Dwayne.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...