Why is speaking in tounges controversal?

[OneLight]

12 minutes ago, Heavenunlimited said:

So where do. I sit, in the middle of this? Ive not been to a charismatic or pentecostal church my whole life, and never cared to either, never thought much of it all, and then, in my kitchen, all of a sudden. During worship. 

Have you studied the gifts yet?  Read 1 Corinthians 12 thru 14.  In chapter 14 you will see two kinds of tongues mentioned.  One is a personal prayer language where one speaks to God directly, which I do often when I am alone and praying.  Sometimes out loud, sometimes not.  I don't know what I am praying for, but have faith that the Holy Spirit knows.  The other is when someone gives a message in church where it needs to have an interpretation, or they should cease.

I am not of any denomination.  I just believe scripture.

[Heavenunlimited]

6 minutes ago, OneLight said:

Have you studied the gifts yet?  Read 1 Corinthians 12 thru 14.  In chapter 14 you will see two kinds of tongues mentioned.  One is a personal prayer language where one speaks to God directly, which I do often when I am alone and praying.  Sometimes out loud, sometimes not.  I don't know what I am praying for, but have faith that the Holy Spirit knows.  The other is when someone gives a message in church where it needs to have an interpretation, or they should cease.

I am not of any denomination.  I just believe scripture.

No I wasnt aware there are two kinds. Yes, im like that too, bible only

[warrior12]

1 hour ago, Heavenunlimited said:

So where do. I sit, in the middle of this? Ive not been to a charismatic or pentecostal church my whole life, and never cared to either, never thought much of it all, and then, in my kitchen, all of a sudden. During worship. 

The Lord knows your heart and would not allow more than you can bear.  Scripture does speak of tongues and as you described it, there is nothing you can really do about it but pray and ask the Lord to show you the way.   If it is spontaneous, then how could you possibly do anything.  If on the other hand, your spirit does not agree with what you are being led with, then it is up to you to make the necessary changes, only you can do that, no one else.

 

[OneLight]

32 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Even though I don't speak in  tongues, I have more scriptural problems with those that deny the gift than those who affirm it. I see tongues all over the Corinthian Church Epistles and Acts...yet not a scrap of biblical evidence that they ceased.

The problem is found in 1 Corinthians 1:10 where scripture tells us "But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away" - the phrase "that which is perfect" is what is debated all the time.

[Guest]

It's the most controversial because of all the gifts it's the easiest to fake. It's also one of the major ones that those on TBN like to go to in order to demonstrate how in the Spirit they are.

Yet in scripture it was called the least of the gifts. But in most Charismatic or Pentecostal churches, without it, you're not really saved.

[OneLight]

Instead of derailing this topic to what church believes what and why, I think it would benefit the OP more to understand the gift from scripture. 

[Ezra]

40 minutes ago, Abdicate said:

There are two types of tongues, those of angels and the spirit, and the other is a foreign language.

No, actually that is simply hyperbole, since no human beings would have a clue about angelic language, and in Scripture angels ALWAYS speak in human language.  What Paul is saying is that even if my tongue-speaking were so exalted as to be angelic language, and I do not have charity/agape/love in my heart, it is meaningless.

When you study what is taught about tongues in 1 Corinthians, Paul is correcting the Corinthians, and therefore all the modern fuss about tongues resembles the Corinthian confusion.  (1) It is the LEAST of the gifts, (2) not all will speak in tongues, and (3) Paul says he would rather speak FIVE intelligible words of teaching than 10,000 words in tongues! That should really settle the matter.

Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (1 Cor 14:19).

All the spiritual gifts are for the edification of others, therefore  "in the church" (assembly).  Private self-edification is simply not taught regarding tongues.

[Ezra]

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

You most likely meant 1Cor 13:1o. But if one takes into account the context the 'perfect' is a person, not a finished canon.

Actually the context leads to the opposite conclusion.  Why would God say "that which is perfect" when He could say "He who is perfect?"  Scripture does not present riddles but truth in simplicity.

There are two separate themes here, and since the Greek text was written continuously, chapter and paragraph divisions (as well as verse divisions) were inserted later. So theme #1 is the canon and theme #2 is the mature Christian. So here is what we have:

THE CANON

Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there beknowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.  But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

THE MATURE CHRISTIAN

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.  For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.  And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Focus on tongues was childishness, hence this digression into Christian maturity:  Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. (1 Cor 14:10).

[firestormx]

6 hours ago, Heavenunlimited said:

Yes, why?  I have never spoken in tounges, ever, until sitting worship in the kitchen, it came bubbling up while I was singing.

 

Acts 2:4

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

I write this to try to help you understand what happened and why. Notice the verse above. Pretty strange wording don't you think? They spoke, as the Holy Spirit gave utterance. They spoke, Holy Spirit gave utterance. What is the difference between speaking and utterance as written in this verse? Simple, They spoke or began to speak simply means they gave the sound. Utterance means words. They gave the sound, and the Holy Spirit gave the words. That means that the utterance given by the Holy spirit is divine Utterance because it comes from the Holy Spirit and not man.

Think of it like this. Doesn't the bible say Prophecy is more desirable than tongues expect someone interrupt? Why? Because nobody would understand what is spoken without an interruption. But if there is an interruption, then tongues is equal to prophecy. How can tongues with an interruption be equal to prophecy if they both were not divine utterance? 

The simple answer is this. We open our mouths in faith, giving joyful noise unto the Lord from our heart. When we do this, in faith, sometimes the Holy Spirit will give the utterance or the words.

[Ezra]

5 minutes ago, Yowm said:

If tongues is meant in that passage to pass away when the Canon was complete, then you would have to also include knowledge (vs 8&9). And let's hope knowledge has not passed away.

Paul was not talking about ordinary knowledge, or the knowledge we acquire from reading Scripture.  He was talking about the SUPERNATURAL GIFT OF KNOWLEDGE given to the apostles (and others) while the NT canon was still incomplete.  And prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are all spiritual gifts related to Divine revelation, hence the written Bible. So, that is not eisegesis at all but, a proper hermeneutic of this passage.  "That which is perfect" has been twisted to mean "He who is perfect", and that is eisegesis.