Speaking in tongues is that ,real or alive today ?

[Omegaman 3.0]

28 minutes ago, StanJ said:

Also, FYI, the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements are not synonymous with one another

I do not know about the history or origins of these "movements", but I distinquish the two terms personally. In my personal definitions, a Pentecostal, is one who looks to Acts 2, and focuses on speaking in tongues, and usually concludes the speaking in tongues is the only sign of the filling of the Holy Spirit. Often, the services of Pentecostals often degenerate into a bunch of people, speaking words and phrases, most often not known languages (if they are languages at all), often all at once, and without interpretation, totally not in keeping in Pauls instructions on the proper exercise of Spiritual gifts. In the worse cases, this can degenerate further, into people rolling on the floor, falling down a lot, laughing for no apparent reason, acting drunk, even wierd dancing. This takes the focus off of Jesus, the gospel, the Bible, or anything else that is clearly for the edification of the church, and can increase the confusin and discomfort of visitors.

By contrast, I see Charismatics, as those who believe in and possibly exercise Spiritual gifting as described in the Bible, and beleive that the gifts of the Spirit continue into the present day, and will likely remain, until the Lord returns.

[OneLight]

15 minutes ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

I do not know about the history or origins of these "movements", but I distinquish the two terms personally. In my personal definitions, a Pentecostal, is one who looks to Acts 2, and focuses on speaking in tongues, and usually concludes the speaking in tongues is the only sign of the filling of the Holy Spirit. Often, the services of Pentecostals often degenerate into a bunch of people, speaking words and phrases, most often not known languages (if they are languages at all), often all at once, and without interpretation, totally not in keeping in Pauls instructions on the proper exercise of Spiritual gifts. In the worse cases, this can degenerate further, into people rolling on the floor, falling down a lot, laughing for no apparent reason, acting drunk, even wierd dancing. This takes the focus off of Jesus, the gospel, the Bible, or anything else that is clearly for the edification of the church, and can increase the confusin and discomfort of visitors.

By contrast, I see Charismatics, as those who believe in and possibly exercise Spiritual gifting as described in the Bible, and beleive that the gifts of the Spirit continue into the present day, and will likely remain, until the Lord returns.

I wonder, have you personally witnessed this type of Pentecostal gatherings?  I have seen one or two on video, but from my personal experience, never like what you describe.  I have witnessed both true tongues and false tongues.  Those that were true were proven true.  Those false, not only does the Spirit witness their falseness, but they never came about or never had an interpretation.  Praying in tongues, to me, should be done in private, but many in the Pentecostal churches will argue against that.

Accepting or rejecting tongues, or any gift for that matter, is not a salvation issue, just a gain or loss in a personal spiritual growth.

[StanJ]

1 hour ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

I do not know about the history or origins of these "movements", but I distinquish the two terms personally. In my personal definitions, a Pentecostal, is one who looks to Acts 2, and focuses on speaking in tongues, and usually concludes the speaking in tongues is the only sign of the filling of the Holy Spirit. Often, the services of Pentecostals often degenerate into a bunch of people, speaking words and phrases, most often not known languages (if they are languages at all), often all at once, and without interpretation, totally not in keeping in Pauls instructions on the proper exercise of Spiritual gifts. In the worse cases, this can degenerate further, into people rolling on the floor, falling down a lot, laughing for no apparent reason, acting drunk, even wierd dancing. This takes the focus off of Jesus, the gospel, the Bible, or anything else that is clearly for the edification of the church, and can increase the confusin and discomfort of visitors.

Sadly in my opinion what you're conveying here is perception, not experience.  I would have to say your personal definition has come about by misinformation. It's not about focusing on speaking in tongues, it's about receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit and experiencing the initial evidence of that baptism. No different than charismatics do. How many actual services have you attended in a Pentecostal Church and where are these churches?  Sadly many cults use the word Pentecostal in their name but that doesn't make them Christian just as cults that use Jesus Christ in their name doesn't make them Christian. It appears to me that your perception of Pentecostals is based more on social media rumours, than it is on facts, and I would exhort you to inform yourself as to the reality of most Pentecostal churches. You would do best to experience a service in one of the following denominations; AOG, COG, or Foursquare.

Edited November 17, 2016 by StanJ

[Leon C. Essex]

Thanks for the response, enoob57 – interesting perspective and much appreciated!

I feel I should likewise extend the courtesy of replying, though I’ll try to keep it brief: it’s getting late here,  and – in any case – I don’t want to become a burden, or even a pain.

2 hours ago, enoob57 said:

Well like most areas of Scripture one must study to show approved... one Scripture to support Ezra's understanding would be that the Scriptures are able to make one perfect

2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)

[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

[17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

With the great seal set upon the Scripture of Revelation the last book written 90's AD one may say after ->the perfect is here due to the ability to make perfect...

This is a great passage about the efficacy of scripture. I won’t waste your time by banging on about minor issues. Rather, I’d just make the point that 2 Timothy was written well before the canon was complete, a fact which would seem to mitigate strongly against your proposition. After all, if your position is that the complete canon is the perfect which has the ability to make perfect, that would render Timothy’s statement inaccurate and presumptuous. Put simply, if he had shared the view that the full canon was the  perfect to come – and that it was the full canon which conferred perfection – he would have been quite wrong to make that claim about the unfinished article….which he did.

The bible’s power to equip, mature and inspire the Christian is well documented. It apparently already had that power in Timothy’s day, despite being incomplete. Timothy himself said so. He made no reference which would suggest that he believed there would be a cessation of spiritual gifts when the letters ceased – he never made that connection.

[enoob57]

Your point is aside from what the Scriptures are actually saying "all Scripture" which at the time was OT and circulated letters being read and copied in the churches... my point is the last of the canon Revelation shows God is finished with Scripture and is complete... which even though not when 2Tim was penned is in fact Scripture and thus the seal set forth the completion of Scripture falling in all times present 'IS' God speaking... Paul and The Holy Spirit writing!

[StanJ]

48 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

Your point is aside from what the Scriptures are actually saying "all Scripture" which at the time was OT and circulated letters being read and copied in the churches... my point is the last of the canon Revelation shows God is finished with Scripture and is complete... which even though not when 2Tim was penned is in fact Scripture and thus the seal set forth the completion of Scripture falling in all times present 'IS' God speaking... Paul and The Holy Spirit writing!

In fact, Revelation is not sealed so I'm not quite sure why you would think that scripture is sealed?

[enoob57]

Revelation 22:18 (KJV)

[18] For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

[19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

[Leon C. Essex]

10 hours ago, Ezra said:

As you well know, Scripture is not a textbook, and Paul's epistles went from topic to topic seamlessly.  There were no verse or chapter divisions either in the original text.  So let's take a fresh look at this passage as though everything was one continuous text.

You are quite right, of course. Paul's epistles will often change tack - in common with most letters. And indeed, chapter and verse were later additions. I see nothing in this passage, however, to indicate it should be read as anything other than one continuous text, so we agree there, too. He actually begins this topic at the start of 1 Corinthians 12, as a discourse on spiritual gifts, but for simplicity we could start at the end of that chapter - as that is the most pertinent section.

11 hours ago, Ezra said:

So if we took 1 Cor 13:8-10 as one topic, and 1 Cor 13:11-12 as a separate topic, there is perfect harmony.

Not at all sure why we would do that. There is already perfect harmony, and Paul is still very much on topic....the same topic. After graphically establishing the supremacy of a single fruit of the Spirit - love - over even the most radical expression of gifts, Paul then describes the temporary aspects of those gifts, and their incomplete nature. Verses 11 and 12 are absolutely consistent with the continuation of this theme, where Paul uses the analogy of childhood to emphasise the temporary and incomplete character of spiritual empowerment.

11 hours ago, Ezra said:

 In the first section Paul speaks of the completion of of the Scriptures ("that which is complete") and in the second section he speaks of a perfect understanding of God and Christ ("shall I know even as I am known") which is now incomplete through Scripture alone and requires face to face communication.

The position that "In the first section Paul speaks of the completion of of the Scriptures ("that which is complete")" is really an unsupported assumption. There is no indication that 'the perfect' to which he alludes is scripture - it isn't even hinted at in the text. I have already made the points about who or what Paul would have considered perfect, and how incongruous it would be to suppose he thought that his writings (and that of others) would somehow enable him to see face to face, and know as he is fully known. There really doesn't seem to be any evidential basis for that interpretation - not in this passage, and not in the bible as a whole.

11 hours ago, Ezra said:

The real issue is that out of about 20 spiritual gifts, Paul speaks of the cessation of three specific gifts, and all of them are related to Divine inspiration.  The knowledge he mentions cannot be ordinary knowledge derived from reading the Bible, but the supernatural knowlede given to the apostles (as Paul mentions a few times in his epistles). Why would these gifts cease?  Because they were no longer necessary.  When would they cease? After the book of Revelation had been completed.

I'd be interested in hearing more of your thoughts on those 20-ish spiritual gifts, Ezra. There are some who believe those actually mentioned in this passage were merely representative of the gifts in general, and some who think Paul specifically selected them because they were the most abused and counterfeited gifts at Corinth. And then there is the partial cessationist position.

Anyhow, thanks for your response - it was appreciated. I had hoped to get back to you last night, but it was 2 am before I finished writing back to enoob, and my mind was already wandering - as evidenced by the fact that at one point I attributed the book of Timothy to Timothy himself. Doh!

 

[StanJ]

10 hours ago, enoob57 said:

Revelation 22:18 (KJV)

[18] For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

[19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

 I'm not sure what you think these verses say but try reading Revelation 22:10