tongues

[SisterActs2]

Hi D-Dawn

I have come back after a day or so's absence to find that other brothers and sisters (thank you all) have answered the questions you have asked me.  I am sorry I couldn't answer you earlier myself.  I have to admit that I didn't want to quote the verses in 1 Cor.12, as Marilyn C. had talked about the difference between private prayer languages and the one reserved for prophecy in the Church.  At the time of your question I had not been able to formulate my answer to you succinctly enough to make the point, and needed time to think about it.

Verse 10 says, in my NASB, "and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills."

Now, you would have to hear/read my full testimony to understand my reasons for believing that my gift of tongues is from The Lord.  It is too long and involved to give here.  It us up to you my dear sister, whom I highly respect for your questions: thank you; as to whether or not you agree or disagree.  I will respect you no matter what.

With regard to the testing of the spirits; we are told to do this.  Of course we must be very aware of the nature of the evil one - the thief comes to kill, steal and destroy.  We must be absolutely sure that something is from God before accepting it into our lives.  Jesus said in Matt: 24:4 "See to it that no one misleads you."  We must be ever vigilant, on guard, as there are many false teachers around now.

There are many members of the body of Christ.  Some will pray in tongues; some won't.  It is all okay whether you do* or don't.  PRAISE HIS HOLY NAME.

*Make sure it is of God, of course (you will know).

[Reinitin]

3 hours ago, Cletus said:

Of course. 

Rev 1:8  I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

But i was referring to the gifts of The Spirit.  And also how some do not believe the gifts are here and now, and how some say its a farce.  And how some say the gifts are not needed.  And while that is absolutely true, they are not necessity, The Book says to desire them.  

I guess its strange to people or maybe they dont realize what all the book says about the gifts.  That we will do greater miracles.  And that word greater literaly means more numerous... and whats it say about they not being able to record them all and would have filled many books?  The same Holy Ghost that came down upon Jesus is the same Spirit we get.  God is Spirit.

We quote the scriptures to desire a long life... but not about the Gifts?  Dont we know how to give good gifts to our children... 

I really dont understand why people shy up from the gifts. 

Well ill put my head on the block. Its bolognia. 3 things i noticed some teach come from verses out of context. One,  thy word is truth. Some people make this mean any verse or part of a verse is truth. But it can not be so. One small example would be, we are told Job's friends spoke untruth about God so in context their ideas about God were wrong. Acording to the false teaching each verse of falsehood the men spoke would be truth. 

SECOND, I believe the seal on revelation is a seal on Johns prophecy not munch different then God putting a seal on daniel. The order of the books are not chronilogical i do not believe John was sealing the cannon as the last words and prophesies he sealed the Revelation and visions given to Him. We still have 2 prophets showing up in the last days how will they speak feom God?

Third, 1 cor 13.. they use the prophecy will cease as their verse out of context con.

 

Love never ends.
But as for prophecies,
they will come to an end;
as for languages, they will cease;
as for knowledge, it will come to an end.
⁹ For we know in part,
and we prophesy in part.
¹⁰ But when the perfect comes,
the partial will come to an end.
¹¹ When I was a child,
I spoke like a child,
I thought like a child,
I reasoned like a child.
When I became a man,
I put aside childish things.
¹² For now we see indistinctly,^[b] as in a mirror,^[c]
but then face to face.
Now I know in part,
but then I will know fully,
as I am fully known.
¹³ Now these three remain:
faith, hope, and love.
But the greatest of these is love

They take it out of its context to make a verse doctrin. If i read the letter it is explained i know when the perfect comes and makes all things known it is the coming of the Lord because i read.  1 corinth 4 Therefore don’t judge anything prematurely, before the Lord comes, who will both bring to light what is hidden in darkness and reveal the intentions of the hearts. And then praise will come to each one from God.

it is a con we still have the testimony of Christ, we still have prophecy. We still have the Holy Spirit teaching us we still have the gift of knowledge. We still have launguages dividing us since babble and we will have gifts of launguages to testify till the Lord comes.

God love them but they crack me up. The ones teaching this are the first ones to acknowledge God reading tbeir mail. They go to church and pasters whole message is a correction to an attitude they picked up or a direct answer to tbeir private conversation with the Lord. They testify to the gifts of prophecy and knowledge operating in their churches but teach a doctrin tbat denies they exsist. So i dunno what to say about it.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Reinitin

[JohnD]

On 4/15/2017 at 6:30 PM, Spock said:

This is one subject I am perplexed by.  I do not want to come out and say they have ceased because I know scripture doesn't come out and say that.  In fact, it says the opposite.  I have been at one church- church of God- where it is done and the minister gives interpretation.  I have discussed this with ministers, and even they are divided. I know John McArthur thinks they have ceased but I just don't know. 

Without sounding blasphemous, that Church of God service sounded scripted and hokey to me, but again, I am not dogmatic and I could be completely off base, so Lord, please don't shoot me down for saying that. 

I just don't know......

but, I lean toward this- tongues may not be gibberjabbish, but may be another language just like at Pentecost. 

I just don't know.....

Walter Martin did an excellent lecture on speaking in tongues. There are two different Greek words used for this speech (dialectos and glossolalia) one refers to known speech and was used to authenticate what was being spoken of was from God... Hebrew fishermen who spoke Aramaic and some Greek speaking in foreign languages they never spoke before. That's a sign. Then there's the language of spirit (prayer) which can sound like gibberish when some were accused of being drunk for doing. Paul spoke of this as a-okay in a personal setting but a hindrance in a public setting unless there is an interpretation. 

I understand all this to mean the sign of speaking in a known (to others) tongue as from the Lord is kaput. We have the complete cannon of scripture now. Such signs are no longer needed and extremely rare (God giving signs, that is). He does miracles all the time. But to authenticate much that is not already authenticated by scripture...

Prayer tongues today? Sure, why not? In private or with an interpretation... but any expository sermon based on scripture can do that and a better job of getting the point across... for so many reasons. Most people can read so seeing it in print in their own Bibles makes a greater impact. Etc.

Faking tongues and requiring one speak in them to be saved... terrible tragedy.

[Spock]

8 hours ago, JohnD said:

Walter Martin did an excellent lecture on speaking in tongues. There are two different Greek words used for this speech (dialectos and glossolalia) one refers to known speech and was used to authenticate what was being spoken of was from God... Hebrew fishermen who spoke Aramaic and some Greek speaking in foreign languages they never spoke before. That's a sign. Then there's the language of spirit (prayer) which can sound like gibberish when some were accused of being drunk for doing. Paul spoke of this as a-okay in a personal setting but a hindrance in a public setting unless there is an interpretation. 

I understand all this to mean the sign of speaking in a known (to others) tongue as from the Lord is kaput. We have the complete cannon of scripture now. Such signs are no longer needed and extremely rare (God giving signs, that is). He does miracles all the time. But to authenticate much that is not already authenticated by scripture...

Prayer tongues today? Sure, why not? In private or with an interpretation... but any expository sermon based on scripture can do that and a better job of getting the point across... for so many reasons. Most people can read so seeing it in print in their own Bibles makes a greater impact. Etc.

Faking tongues and requiring one speak in them to be saved... terrible tragedy.

Good post John.  I don't know if it is 100% spot on because like I said, I just don't know.  I came up in that period where Pentecostalism was huge and some of my friends spoke in tongues.  They even laid hands on me and asked for God to give that gift to me. He didn't. They wanted me to attend this class to learn how which I thought was a joke so I walked away. 

Honestly, I don't even want to pray in gibberish so if someone finds comfort or blessing in doing that, fine by me. 

Edited April 19, 2017 by Spock
Spelling

[Reinitin]

8 hours ago, JohnD said:

Walter Martin did an excellent lecture on speaking in tongues. There are two different Greek words used for this speech (dialectos and glossolalia) one refers to known speech and was used to authenticate what was being spoken of was from God... Hebrew fishermen who spoke Aramaic and some Greek speaking in foreign languages they never spoke before. That's a sign. Then there's the language of spirit (prayer) which can sound like gibberish when some were accused of being drunk for doing. Paul spoke of this as a-okay in a personal setting but a hindrance in a public setting unless there is an interpretation. 

I understand all this to mean the sign of speaking in a known (to others) tongue as from the Lord is kaput. We have the complete cannon of scripture now. Such signs are no longer needed and extremely rare (God giving signs, that is). He does miracles all the time. But to authenticate much that is not already authenticated by scripture...

Prayer tongues today? Sure, why not? In private or with an interpretation... but any expository sermon based on scripture can do that and a better job of getting the point across... for so many reasons. Most people can read so seeing it in print in their own Bibles makes a greater impact. Etc.

Faking tongues and requiring one speak in them to be saved... terrible tragedy.

I studied and found also there are 2 different works of the Spirit both translated to "tounges". But i also studied the canonical idea and there is no scriptural backing i found unless you take verses out of context. 

Every false doctrin i dissected was supported  by taking scripture out of context, breaking translation rules to support a false truth or a superstition, pegan tradition or enchantment conected to and taught with a scripture.

 

Edited April 19, 2017 by Reinitin

[enoob57]

On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 0:20 AM, Reinitin said:

SECOND, I believe the seal on revelation is a seal on Johns prophecy not munch different then God putting a seal on daniel. The order of the books are not chronilogical i do not believe John was sealing the cannon as the last words and prophesies he sealed the Revelation and visions given to Him. We still have 2 prophets showing up in the last days how will they speak feom God?

That's a real problem when the context of Revelation is spelled out here

Revelation 1:19 (KJV)

[19] Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Write the things which thou hast seen  -Chapter 1 (what John had vision of)
the things which are                               -Chapters 2-3 (the seven churches)
the things which shall be hereafter       -Chapters 4-22 (the future all the way to the eternal state)

and then the seal is placed on the subject matter... how could anyone convolute this clear God given contextual understanding of Revelation? This clearly is a seal from John's vision of chapter 1 into the eternal state and God's seal is saying I am done speaking all 'IS' said thus the doctrine of closed cannon. An open cannon is in direct defiance of what God has written.
Love, Steven

[Reinitin]

15 hours ago, enoob57 said:

That's a real problem when the context of Revelation is spelled out here

Revelation 1:19 (KJV)

[19] Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Write the things which thou hast seen  -Chapter 1 (what John had vision of)
the things which are                               -Chapters 2-3 (the seven churches)
the things which shall be hereafter       -Chapters 4-22 (the future all the way to the eternal state)

and then the seal is placed on the subject matter... how could anyone convolute this clear God given contextual understanding of Revelation? This clearly is a seal from John's vision of chapter 1 into the eternal state and God's seal is saying I am done speaking all 'IS' said thus the doctrine of closed cannon. An open cannon is in direct defiance of what God has written.
Love, Steven

Ill have to study it from that perspective. I do study in greek and have never seen any such claim stated or suggested  in the book or the seal its very specific to Johns revelation.

Revelation is dated 68 a.d.. The book of John was written about 85 a.d. Would be a direct defiance of the seal in the context your proclaiming. Then the epistles of John were written about 85-90. If that is how He ment it he would not of kept writting after it or those two books would be illegitimate and a rebellion against God. I think the way the seal is being taught is doctrin of men and borderline sorcery JOHN wouldnt of written more revelation of Christ if that is what the seal ment.

Have you ever studied how it was decided and who decided to put revelation last and when and why it started being taught as a seal on the cannon?

I have no problem being in direct defiance of false teachers and false teachings and socery.

Revelation wasnt always last.

http://biblehub.com/library/davidson/the_canon_of_the_bible/chapter_viii_order_of_the.htm

Edited April 20, 2017 by Reinitin

[enoob57]

7 hours ago, Reinitin said:

Ill have to study it from that perspective. I do study in greek and have never seen any such claim stated or suggested  in the book or the seal its very specific to Johns revelation.

Revelation is dated 68 a.d.. The book of John was written about 85 a.d. Would be a direct defiance of the seal in the context your proclaiming. Then the epistles of John were written about 85-90. If that is how He ment it he would not of kept writting after it or those two books would be illegitimate and a rebellion against God. I think the way the seal is being taught is doctrin of men and borderline sorcery JOHN wouldnt of written more revelation of Christ if that is what the seal ment.

Have you ever studied how it was decided and who decided to put revelation last and when and why it started being taught as a seal on the cannon?

I have no problem being in direct defiance of false teachers and false teachings and socery.

Revelation wasnt always last.

http://biblehub.com/library/davidson/the_canon_of_the_bible/chapter_viii_order_of_the.htm

The determination of the Gospel of John date and The revelation date are non determining to the closed cannon of Scripture due to the fact of authorship... if suspected dates are correct John merely was moved by God to finish His Word with John eyewitness account of God in a human body... God being the only One who could be authorized without regard to seal as He was assembling as to His pleasure and purpose... The point in fact is The Gospel of John is historical in nature, an account of what was witnessed, and really doesn't violate the seal in anyway as to addendum to the Word of God. Rather I view it as oh by the way and reveals what He, God, had placed inside His chosen vessel John as witness to the truth of His Son! The construct of Revelation is determined by subject matter was, is and will be and to be contextually obedient that is where the seal resides and John's account is certainly of the was.  The was is certainly sealed as no more eyewitness; the is I believe is the now (Church age), and the will be is after the rapture of The Church... even within the Revelation after chapter 3 God's bride is no longer mentioned till Revelation 20.

[Sister]

On 18/04/2017 at 1:33 AM, Reinitin said:

Yes i was just talking about our Lord and his love for us, his full divinity and full humanity on the cross reconciling us to God and the purposes of God through the cross shown in His prayer for us in John 17, plus i showed in Genesis the difrences between created and made and How Christ in us was His plan of making us into His likness from the begining. Yes i was speaking english but he heard everything i said in chinese and he understood and believed the gospel and called on the Lord to make our Father known to him.

Thank you Reinitin,

Just as I thought!  Now that has a purpose, just like in Acts 2. 

[Reinitin]

4 hours ago, enoob57 said:

The determination of the Gospel of John date and The revelation date are non determining to the closed cannon of Scripture due to the fact of authorship... if suspected dates are correct John merely was moved by God to finish His Word with John eyewitness account of God in a human body... God being the only One who could be authorized without regard to seal as He was assembling as to His pleasure and purpose... The point in fact is The Gospel of John is historical in nature, an account of what was witnessed, and really doesn't violate the seal in anyway as to addendum to the Word of God. Rather I view it as oh by the way and reveals what He, God, had placed inside His chosen vessel John as witness to the truth of His Son! The construct of Revelation is determined by subject matter was, is and will be and to be contextually obedient that is where the seal resides and John's account is certainly of the was.  The was is certainly sealed as no more eyewitness; the is I believe is the now (Church age), and the will be is after the rapture of The Church... even within the Revelation after chapter 3 God's bride is no longer mentioned till Revelation 20.

That doesnt make since at all.

Paul wasnt an eye witness of the burial or resurection. Paul is a witness to Christ participating in the growth of his church after his ascension.

John would not put a heavenly seal that shut the doors of heaven with a curse to those who ingnore it, then go finish and ad to it himself later. He is not going to break a word he established.

Revelation was circulated independent for decades and then not even included as scripture for quite awhile.

So who had the revelation of God that it was the seal of 66 books and the end of Gods gifts and interactions with his church?

I have read the whole bible and have not seen any such thing mentioned that would suport Jesus or John having the Character to do as your saying.. Its completly opposed to the Lords prayers and promises.

Revelation was sealed by Jesus as Gods Word and a curse Was established on earth and in heaven before the ink was dry. A blessing for those who read established at the begining and a curse for any who would tanper. It wasnt a word of God and warning for a future book not finished yet. Its not a proclomation He wont be needing gifts of his Spirit to steer his church or correct his church or encourage his church anymore.

Of course anyone who handles any scripture should take great care not to twist the word of God. But its not a seal with a curse saying i have finished all i have to say to you till i come again. The Lord obviously is steal teaching and participating in every generation.

JESUS said all day long you search scriptures because you think you will find eternal life in them but you refuse to cone to me that i might give you life the scriptures speak of me.

He didnt leave us a orphanes with only scripture to search.

 

Edited April 20, 2017 by Reinitin