Do we have view of tongues right?

[missmuffet]

7 hours ago, Amigo42 said:

Is it possible that we have the entire view of tongues wrong?  If you read the passage, it shows that everyone heard the gospel in their own tongue.  So, for example, an apostle may have been preaching in Aramaic to a crowd of 20 nationalities, but with each hearing their languages.  In other words, was the gift of tongues in the part of those who heard.  This would mean that the apostles may not have actually spoken any language except their own.  

I don't support tongues for today. There is no evidence that Jesus spoke in tongues so what is the point?

[missmuffet]

Just now, Chicken coop2 said:

Just because Jesus didn't do it doesn't mean it didn't exist, because it did.  Various verses have been posted about it. And why did it need to have ever stopped? 

I am not saying it did not exist way back in the NT times. 

[Joulre2abba]

8 hours ago, Amigo42 said:

Is it possible that we have the entire view of tongues wrong?  If you read the passage, it shows that everyone heard the gospel in their own tongue.  So, for example, an apostle may have been preaching in Aramaic to a crowd of 20 nationalities, but with each hearing their languages.  In other words, was the gift of tongues in the part of those who heard.  This would mean that the apostles may not have actually spoken any language except their own.  

Yes, the various different nationals heard words in their own language. No, they didn't hear the gospel, they heard words of praise unto God, (Acts 2:11).

If the gift of tongues were upon those who heard, as you describe it, then it should have been written that it was the gift of hearing, but that would be contradictory with the text which states that the 120 were speaking by the Holy Spirit. It doesn't say that anyone was hearing by the Holy Spirit.

[debrakay]

Matthew 11:15 (NKJV)  He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

This same verse is repeated over and over in Revelation.  I speak in tongues only to the Lord in prayer and not in front of my church congregation.  I believe this is one of the mysteries Jesus spoke of.  Tongues is a spiritual prayer language for me.  I pray in English and a spiritual language both.

There have been several times throughout the past that I have felt an evil spirit try to oppress me and each time that I cry out in my spirit language the the evilness goes.  The first time I was young and all I could do was barely get the word "Jesus" out of my mouth.  The heaviness of evil was actually suffocating me.  The second and third times I was able to recognize the devil was trying to intimidate and scare me and I spoke in tongues.  He was gone!  The last time I scared my husband as I sat up in bed with hands raised and shouted in tongues!  That was probably ten years ago.  Praise the Lord!  These encounters are etched in my mind like yesterday and they are not of this world.

Jesus may not have spoken in tongues but He also spent much time alone with the Father so we honestly have no idea how He communicated with the Father.  He did tell the disciples that the fire of the Holy Spirit would come upon them once He was gone from earth.

John 14:15-17  “If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. 

And then they assemble at Pentecost and the Holy Spirit comes:

Acts 2:3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them.

What were these tongues of fire and why did Luke use the word "tongues" to describe the fire?  I need to do a study on the word "tongues" and see if the Greek word is the same or different.

Acts 2:4  All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

I believe that those who heard gibberish and called them drunks, were unable to hear the words of God.  Those with hard hearts still have a hard time hearing the voice of God.  Those who heard in their own language or dialect where able to "hear and understand" by the power of the Holy Spirit.  

The Holy Spirit of God moves in mysterious ways, yesterday, today, and forever.

Edited July 5, 2021 by debrakay

[Paul James]

13 hours ago, Amigo42 said:

Is it possible that we have the entire view of tongues wrong?  If you read the passage, it shows that everyone heard the gospel in their own tongue.  So, for example, an apostle may have been preaching in Aramaic to a crowd of 20 nationalities, but with each hearing their languages.  In other words, was the gift of tongues in the part of those who heard.  This would mean that the apostles may not have actually spoken any language except their own.  

You need to read the passage clearly.  It actually says that the disciples were speaking of the wonderful works of God when they were speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost, definitely not preaching the Gospel.

It was in response to the reaction of the hearers hearing the wonderful works of God being spoken in their own regional dialects, that Peter got up and preached the Gospel to them, and he did not preach it in tongues, but in clear Aramaic, the common language of the time.

The notion that the Gospel was preached in tongues comes from some silly amateur theologian who lacked the skill of comprehension to read the Bible correctly.

[Paul James]

9 hours ago, enoob57 said:

The major issue of tongues is that it removes communication and reverts to emotions/feelings... You just have to read John 17 to understand God’s method of communication is through His Word... 

Rubbish.  Emotions/feelings don't come into it.  Praying in tongues is deliberately, by faith, speaking to God in an unlearned language, the words being inspired by the Holy Spirit.   I have been praying in tongues, without any trace of emotion or feelings for the last 53 years, and most sound Pentecostals will say the same.   Just because some uninformed theologian has stated that tongues is an "ecstatic" language, doesn't mean that he is right, or what he says  is true about tongues.  The reality is that tongues is communication with God in the Spirit.  Take some time to read 1 Corinthians 14:2 to see what tongues actually is.

 

7 hours ago, other one said:

I think it would greatly depend on who "We" is.

The "we" would include those who read into 1 Corinthians 14, and ignore the parts that don't go along with their pet views of what they think tongues is, which is usually based on uninformed nonsense.

[enoob57]

2 minutes ago, Paul James said:

The reality is that tongues is communication with God in the Spirit.  Take some time to read 1 Corinthians 14:2 to see what tongues actually is.

And you know this how?

[Paul James]

2 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

And you know this how?

"He who speaks in tongues speaks to God [communication], hence no man understands him [not in an language naturally understood by anyone in the room]; he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

There is no mention of emotions/feelings anywhere in 1 Corinthians 14.  Paul says that the speaking in tongues is under the total control of the speaker, while emotions/feelings are not under the direct control of the person.  If tongues was dependent on emotions, then the person speaking would have no control over the utterance.  If he didn't have any emotion or feeling (like goosebumps up the spine) he wouldn't be able to speak in tongues;  but according to Paul tongues-speakers do have total control whether they feel emotion or not.   In actual fact, the sense of a release in the Spirit comes as the result of speaking with tongues, rather than the cause of it.

If the sole means of communication anyone has comes just through the mind, then they are limited to that.  They can pray only with the understanding.  They can't pray with the Spirit because the Spirit prays through a person using tongues.  You might say that you are guided by the Spirit when you are praying in your normal language, but the prayer is still coming through your mind and therefore limited by it.  Paul uses the word "understanding" where we would use "the mind", which means exactly the same.  So Paul says that he prays with his mind, and also with the Spirit, making a distinction between his mind and the Spirit.   And the context for him saying this, is in relation to tongues, because that is what the chapter is all about.  So Paul is quite clear that when he refers to praying with his spirit (or in the Spirit) he clearly means with tongues.

This is where those who pray in tongues have an enhanced communication with God in the Spirit, over and above those who are limited to pray just through the limitations of their mind.  When those who are limited by their mind run out of words to say, their prayer stops because they no longer have anything to say to God.

But the person who prays in tongues continues to communicate with God when he runs out of words through his mind.  He continues to pray without ceasing in the Spirit as the Holy Spirit inspires the words.

[enoob57]

56 minutes ago, Paul James said:

"He who speaks in tongues speaks to God [communication], hence no man understands him [not in an language naturally understood by anyone in the room]; he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

There is no mention of emotions/feelings anywhere in 1 Corinthians 14.  Paul says that the speaking in tongues is under the total control of the speaker, while emotions/feelings are not under the direct control of the person.  If tongues was dependent on emotions, then the person speaking would have no control over the utterance.  If he didn't have any emotion or feeling (like goosebumps up the spine) he wouldn't be able to speak in tongues;  but according to Paul tongues-speakers do have total control whether they feel emotion or not.   In actual fact, the sense of a release in the Spirit comes as the result of speaking with tongues, rather than the cause of it.

If the sole means of communication anyone has comes just through the mind, then they are limited to that.  They can pray only with the understanding.  They can't pray with the Spirit because the Spirit prays through a person using tongues.  You might say that you are guided by the Spirit when you are praying in your normal language, but the prayer is still coming through your mind and therefore limited by it.  Paul uses the word "understanding" where we would use "the mind", which means exactly the same.  So Paul says that he prays with his mind, and also with the Spirit, making a distinction between his mind and the Spirit.   And the context for him saying this, is in relation to tongues, because that is what the chapter is all about.  So Paul is quite clear that when he refers to praying with his spirit (or in the Spirit) he clearly means with tongues.

This is where those who pray in tongues have an enhanced communication with God in the Spirit, over and above those who are limited to pray just through the limitations of their mind.  When those who are limited by their mind run out of words to say, their prayer stops because they no longer have anything to say to God.

But the person who prays in tongues continues to communicate with God when he runs out of words through his mind.  He continues to pray without ceasing in the Spirit as the Holy Spirit inspires the words.

Quote

This is where those who pray in tongues have an enhanced communication with God in the Spirit, over and above those who are limited to pray just through the limitations of their mind.

None of this here tells how you have tried the spirits to see if this is of God... if this is beyond you and your mind then the thing itself, which is beyond you, is your trust factor? And how if it excludes you in it’s practice can be determined to be of God?

[enoob57]

3 minutes ago, Chicken coop2 said:

When you experience it, you know it. 

Then it’s source of validation is intuitions and feelings with the individual and God’s Word is not involved with it at all in verification...