 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > speaking in tongues | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/16/2003 5:14 AM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
soedton ehtecripturs heactsu thatsonguet ydifesu?
OK, here's the first clue to unravel the mystery. Separate each word, like so:
soed not eht ecripturs heact su that songuet ydife su?
There's one simple step to understanding this. Later!
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/16/2003 5:15 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
soedton ehtecripturs heactsu thatsonguet ydifesu?
OK, here's the first clue to unravel the mystery. Separate each word, like so:
soed ton eht ecripturs heact su that songuet ydife su?
There's one simple step to understanding this. Later!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 5/16/2003 5:56 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
quote:
soedton ehtecripturs heactsu thatsonguet ydifesu?
OK, here's the first clue to unravel the mystery. Separate each word, like so:
soed ton eht ecripturs heact su that songuet ydife su?
There's one simple step to understanding this. Later!
does not the scripture teach us that tongues edify us?
"sagase sagase tanoshii koto sagase" -- Ichii Yuri
Edited by - Laika on 05/16/2003 10:59:45 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 5/16/2003 10:34 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom,
It was pretty easy to see what your example really said. That's why I said, "Tom might be edified" in reference to the John Doe situation. Of course, Don just said tongues is communication with God and not man. So, Tom might not be edified, if he is a man (I have no reason to doubt Tom is a man).
Don,
I hope I haven't come across as adversarial in a negative sense. It certainly isn't my intention to do so.
Dr. S. Lewis Johnson was senior pastor of Believer's Chapel in Northern Dallas during the 1970's, while he was a professor at Dallas Theological. His concept of the church included evangelistic services on Sunday mornings when non-beleivers would be most prone to attend. The church assembled for the evening service to commune and participate in communion (after all, it's called the "Lord's Supper" not the "Lord's Lunch"). Non-believers do attend church, else the bus ministries of the Independent Baptists would suffer from non-participation. (Isn't it strange that their attendance is always about the same even though they have hundreds of baptisms per year?)
May I remind you about what Jesus said about signs?
Matthew 12:38-39 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
Matthew 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.
"for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries." I Cor. 14.2 So, believers and non-believers alike are without an understanding of tongues, are not being edified and gain no benefit by its use, unless there is an interpreter.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 5/16/2003 11:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Paul(5378-1) says:quote:
So, believers and non-believers alike are without an understanding of tongues, are not being edified and gain no benefit by its use, unless there is an interpreter.
First, we're ok.
I guess we will have to take this a piece at a time...
4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
Your right, the speaking in tongues TO my brother will not edify unless an interpreter is present. But, speaking in tongues TO God will edify me. Thus indirectly to the benefit of my brother and the unbeliever. In verse 5 I don't think he is taking away tongues , but adding prophesy in a public setting. I think v.5 could say , "I would like every one of you to speak in tongues [privately], but I would rather have you prophesy [publicly]."
I especially find things like TV preachers speaking in tongues on the air to be totally tasteless ( although it does increase the chance that a Jew is present ).
peace and love, don
---
"No Rules, just Right" Outback Steakhouse | | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 5/16/2003 5:31 PM (GMT -6) | | Don,
We might also say that which tongues may accomplish would be expedited by simply speaking what can be understood. Sort of like preaching in Spanish to an English speaking audience through an interpreter when I have the ability to speak and be understood in English. Surely God can deliver a message to me in a language I understand just as easily as He can deliver a message in a language I don't understand.
Since I am a believer and I'm not Jewish, what is the significance in tongues for me? If you and I and Tom were to meet together, assuming we are all believers and not Jewish, what would the significance in tongues be in our meeting? Should one of us speak in tongues and be edified while leaving the other two out? Shouldn't we each desire that which is best for the others and give rather than receive? I don't know that watching an egocentric event would be especially edifying for the other two.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Asher
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 477
| Posted 7/9/2003 1:06 PM (GMT -6) | | I'll share something that recently happened to me.
I was saved in an independent Baptist church and later went to Albania as a Baptist missionary. In my scripture studies and interaction with charismatics in Albania, I came to the point where I could no longer take the stand against spiritual gifts that my Baptist heritage demanded. On my first furlough, I explained this and some other changes of mine to my pastor and...long story short...I was put on church discipline til I saw the error of my ways.
I've asked God for tongues, but not, I think, in an unbalanced way. It's not the end all and be all of my spiritual life. I've not been "stuck" on this point, but I do think about it from time to time and ask for tongues at those moments. I've wondered if my Baptist background made it difficult to experience this gift.
Anyways, recently I had a dream that was interesting from several perspectives. First, there was NO visual image content to the dream. I didn't see anything. In my dream, I was worshipping and praising God very actively. I was choosing to worship God. My emotions were peaked in my expression of worship. My intellect was fully engaged. I was saying great poetic things to God about how I felt about Him. No, I can't remember what I said exactly ;) My praise built to a crescendo.
I reached my natural limits of expression, but there was more "stuff" pent up in my spirit. I pushed against my limits of thought, emotion, and will wanting to go farther in exalting God, but I couldn't.
Then I was aware of another Person present with me. Again, no visual. Somehow I knew that it was the Holy Spirit. He led me into speaking, worshipping, praising, praying in tongues. My burden was released as I made this expression to God. It didn't seem to be an experience that was against my mind or the use of it...it just allowed me go farther than my mental, emotional and volitional abilities.
OK, so I woke up and felt VERY spiritually refreshed.
Was God more able to impart this to me in a dream than in my waking life? I don't know. But the whole experience was interesting and good.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/10/2003 3:38 AM (GMT -6) | | You experience, though in a dream, seems to me along Scriptural lines; that is, you were bursting with an expression, particularly worship, that came out in tongues.
Go back and read the incidents in Scripture where speaking in tongues takes place, and you will almost always see it in the context of praise, thanks giving, "declaring the wonderful things of God." What I do not believe is Scriptural is praying; i.e., "Well, I have this burden to pray for Larry, but I just don't know what to pray about, so I'll pray in tongues."
I think Paul's usage of this kind of language in Romans 8 and in I Corinthians 14 had nothing to do with this kind of prayer. (That kind of teaching became prominent when the charismatic renewal took place early on in this ... ahem ... the, uh, last century--early 1900s.) I DO, however, believe that what you experienced is right along the lines of what the NT visage is of the early church's experience, starting in Acts 2. They burst forth with an expression of praise, worship and thanksgiving to God in tongues.
So, seeking to better worship God, seeking to be filled with His Spirit, seeking to have a gift from Him that will enhance your walk with Hiim is what it's all about!
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 7/10/2003 5:25 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey Starkman...
I Cor 14:
14. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
15. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
What do you think Paul is getting at when he says "pray with my spirit" ?
peace and love, don
---
"You cannot step twice into the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you." Heraclitus | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 7/10/2003 6:05 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 7/10/2003 7:14 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
So what exactly does shandala mean?
Shandala is a proper name. Shandala is one of the archangels that work with Gab & Mike. When the name is referenced in prayer it is a call to the angel to provide assistance.
peace and love, don
---
"You cannot step twice into the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you." Heraclitus | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/10/2003 1:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Might-be-don ...
quote:
Shandala is a proper name. Shandala is one of the archangels that work with Gab & Mike. When the name is referenced in prayer it is a call to the angel to provide assistance.
Eee gads!
quote:
I Cor 14:
14. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
15. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
What do you think Paul is getting at when he says "pray with my spirit" ?
The next two verses (16-17) commentary the translation of this context of speaking in tongues (I'm using the NASB): "Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks .... For you are giving thanks well enough ...." (Even then, Paul was a stickler: one should save it for personal edification if there's either no interpretor or it's inappropriate.)
This blessing and giving of thanks is consistent with the rest of the demonstrations of speaking in tongues and being filled with the Spirit in Scripture where there is commentary as to what was actually being said or meant:
Acts 2 - the nearby listeners hear the disciples speaking the wonderful works of God as the disciples are being baptized in the Spirit (2:11).
Acts 10 - Cornelius's small group is baptized with the Spirit and when they speak in tongues it is also said that they are exalting God (10:46). I think this can be interpreted to mean that Cornelius's group was doing nothing more but praising the Lord when they spoke in tongues. What else would they be doing? Prayer and petition? I can't see this context viable for that interpretation.
Luke 1 - When Elizabeth was filled with the Spirit--granted, this is before the Church is born, but I don't think that's a real issue--she indirectly glorifies God and declares His wonderous works by pointing out to Mary that God has visited her in a special, unique way; her glorifying God and her declarations ARE her prayer (1:39-45).
There is no reason to interpret the use of tongues in the NT as a prayer language or the word tongues to mean anything other then earthly languages known to mankind. I believe Scripture shows it to be praise, thanksgiving and declaring the wonders of God.
Laika asks a phenomenal question: what does Shandala mean? Well, according to neo-charismatic theology (and I mean no disrespect here), it can mean, "I've got this burden for Bob, and I just don't know what to pray; I'll pray in tongues. Or it can mean, "I'm fighting a spiritual battle, and I'm going to use my spiritual language to fight, because I can do better warfare that way than I can in my own language.
Shandala can mean anything it is made to mean. So many "prayer languages" anong Christians not only sound alike but also are repeated in a manner that's linguistically impossible to interpret as diverse prayers in an unknown tongue, be it a known or unkown language (if "unknown languages were true). The same exact phrases can't mean two or more different things, yet this is exactly what you'll hear happen when so many people pray, praise or sing in tongues. And the usual explanation given for the constant repetition of the same phrases and the similarities between two people's "prayer langauge" is that it is spiritual; God knows what's being said.
I contend first that there is no such thing as a "heavenly" tongue given to man by the Spirit; given only are those languages we know on earth ("Though I speak with the tongues of men or angels ..." Paul was simply trying to make a point about love, not languages.) Further, it's far-removed theology from Romans 8:26-27 to interpret these verses as supporting non-earthly languages and the concept of a prayer langauge. The Romans passage is no where near this in context to what Paul has been after all along in the book of Romans much less chapter in 8.
Finally, one is dealing with the very deep-seated part of the emotions when one's neo-charismatic theology is challenged as I'm doing now. It is very, very hard (and I'm trying to be very sensitive to those who disagree with and hold to what I'm challenging) to admit one might be wrong in this area; one's very experience is at stake. That's a hard one. It's not the same as changing a doctrinal belief. No, this involves the very outward expressions of people's hearts, in their own private lives as well as in the face of other's lives. One faces (or at least thinks they face) humiliation of one admits one was wrong in this kind of experience. Very hard, indeed, to question one's experience.
But that doesn't mean the experience is valid or Scriptural. I'm one who does believe in, but doesn't practice, the gifts of the Spirit. I thought once I was baptized with the Spirit, but in all honesty I had to admit I wasn't; it was my own emotionalism trying to experience what I thought it was supposed to be. If it's important enough to God, He'll ensure I get the real McCoy.
For the challenge,
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Asher
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 477
| Posted 7/11/2003 5:39 PM (GMT -6) | | Starkman,
I...generally...agree with your thoughts on the misuse of tongues. Just because we accept the possibility of tongues does not mean that we must accept every instance of their use. However, I would not say that it is not possible to pray in a tongue. I wouldn't say that tongues is only or primarily a "prayer language", but to say that it's not possible to pray in a tongue...
If tongues are languages...whether earthly, heavenly, human or angelic...then ipso facto they CAN be used for prayer. Language is communication. Prayer is communication. We pray in English. Why couldn't we pray in another tongue?
Rob
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/11/2003 6:16 PM (GMT -6) | | Shandala?
Couldn't resist. Had to "Google it."
quote:
Dr Tetyana Shandala Post-Doctoral Fellow Ph.D. (USSR). Location, Room 1.32, Molecular Life Sciences Building. Email, tetyana.shandala@adelaide.edu.au. ...
Shandala
... Shandala lives in a world where magic used to be plentiful. ... Shandala screamed with excitement as Bandermane followed his Herd mistress over the cliff. ...
Broken Saints a la Sponge
Shandala. Lost at sea as a child, Shandala was found and raised by a
small tribe on the island of Lomalagi. After her surrogate mother ...
Broken Saints - Evil Sponge style ... Oran Kneels, Red Splash Page, Blue Splash Page, An Angel. Raimi as Voldo, Oran appears angry, Shandala with starry hair, Tortured. Oran ...
Too much fun! | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/11/2003 7:11 PM (GMT -6) | | When I first experienced speaking in tongues it was a very overwhelming experience of the love of God, very hard to put into words. I have no doubt that some people, because they are under pressure to appear spiritual, may in fact not be manifesting the genuine gift. All I can say is that for me, it was and continues to be a very life-changing, positive, extremely intimate experience of prayer, praise, worship, and thanksgiving to God. The fact that many might abuse this gift or even fake it does not in and of itself discount the genuine. As 1 Cor. 12-14 teaches us, gifts should be properly channeled/directed, not quenched.
I've had people try to say what I have is of the devil. I wonder why the devil would influence you to love people like you never thought you could before? I wonder why the devil would make you want to live closer to God and be more in love with Jesus than you had previously thought possible? I wonder why the devil would want you to have something even remotely similar the Spirit bearing witness with your spirit, that you are a child of God? I wonder why the devil would give one a burden for lost souls?
Love,
John
P.S.: In a similar vein to Asher's experience, a very interesting thing that has happened to me on several occasions is that my roommates in college said I sometimes spoke in tongues in my sleep.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
Edited by - John Earp on 07/12/2003 12:55:44 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/12/2003 1:10 PM (GMT -6) | | A Google search of Shandala ... leave it to the king of searches, PoW!!!
quote:
If tongues are languages...whether earthly, heavenly, human or angelic...then ipso facto they CAN be used for prayer. Language is communication. Prayer is communication. We pray in English. Why couldn't we pray in another tongue?
Apart from I Cor. 14 and Romans 8, (which I addressed above), there isn't anything to substantiate praying--petition, burden and that kind of prayer--in Scripture. Just because tongues means langauges, does not mean that you can pray in them. It means that they are used by God for His purposes (building up the church) and for self-edification; that doesn't have to mean praying in the petition/burden. Indeed, I believe it does not mean those kinds of praying.
All Scripture suggests, as far as I can see, is that the literal understanding of speaking in tongues--were we to be able to understand what it is we are saying--is praise, thanksgiving and declaring the wonders of God. That doesn't take the mind to do so; it takes the emotional aspect (unattached in this regard from the intelligence; the mind) and manifests it through vocal demonstration. One is not in control of what is being said; one doesn't need to be in control. But when we talk about praying petitions and burdens, Scripture simply does not teach that this is what the gift is for. If you have to pray about something, do so. If you have a burden about something, take it before God. But I contend, that there's no logic, spirituality, or Scriptural grounds in the use of tongues for these purposes. I just can't find it Scripturally supported, and I can't, therefore, justify it based on the subjective experiences of others.
Let's look (graciously and thankfully so) at some of John's post, the one he posted just above mine. quote:
When I first experienced speaking in tongues it was a very overwhelming experience of the love of God, very hard to put into words. I have no doubt that some people, because they are under pressure to appear spiritual, may in fact not be manifesting the genuine gift. All I can say is that for me, it was and continues to be a very life-changing, positive, extremely intimate experience of prayer, praise, worship, and thanksgiving to God.
Excellent. I see nothing out of Scriptural bounds with what he's said. I only would take issue, perhaps, with what he may mean by "praying" in tongues. But this post is right on target with what we know of the Baptism of the Spirit in Scripture: there is praise, worship, a closer walk with God, intimacy, and building up of the church. Excellent!
quote:
I've had people try to say what I have is of the devil. I wonder why the devil would influence you to love people like you never thought you could before? I wonder why the devil would make you want to live closer to God and be more in love with Jesus than you had previously thought possible? I wonder why the devil would want you to have something even remotely similar the Spirit bearing witness with your spirit, that you are a child of God? I wonder why the devil would give one a burden for lost souls?
Again, a great post. The only thing I would add to this is that Satan might try to get a Christian to counterfeit a gift of God IF the product of doing so is a (sincere but) wrong sense of drawing closer to God. For instance, I thought I had the gift of tongues, or rather, just spoke in tongues. I realized some time later that I hadn't, admitted it and that was that. But for someone else, that could be devistating, particularly if that person is ultra steeped in a neo-charismatic church, like the Assemblies of God, for instance (and I attended, and would attend again, Assemblies of God churches off and on all my life). Man, that can be almost crushing on the esteem of a person and embarrassing to them in no little amount. Worse, it can really crush a person's trust in God, which should only be built on faith in Him and His Word.
I think, based on what John has said, his experience is valid. (Were I to meet him, I might think, "Boy, what $&(#^!" HA! Just kidding ya, John!)
For the Baptism in the Spirit,
Starkman
Edited by - Starkman on 07/12/2003 6:14:52 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 7/12/2003 2:20 PM (GMT -6) | | John-P.S.: In a similar vein to Asher's experience, a very interesting thing that has happened to me on several occasions is that my roommates in college said I sometimes spoke in tongues in my sleep.
I've been told in the past twice that I spoke French in my sleep, I guess thats what comes from sleeping in French Class!!!
dlw
I-uh-scream-uh,
You-uh-scream-uh,
We-all-uh-sceam-uh for
Ice-uh-cream-uh!!!
Roberto Bernigni in
Down by Law. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/12/2003 2:37 PM (GMT -6) | | Starkman:
Just because YOU had a pseudo-experience does not mean everyone else is as gullible as you.
I couldn't care less whether you think my experience is valid or not. Anybody can doubt anything. I could doubt you are born again, but what would or could my doubting prove?
Edited by - John Earp on 07/12/2003 7:45:25 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/12/2003 3:08 PM (GMT -6) | | John, I thought it was more than clear that my experience was neither here nor there when it comes to the validity of the Baptism with the Spirit. I not only DIDN'T mean what you think I meant, but the exact opposite, namely that experience cannot justify the doctrine; the truth of the doctrine must come from Scripture's teaching. My experience means nothing in regard to the subject. Nothing at all. Further, I thought your experience was dead-on with Scripture's teaching. (I did note, though, one issue I "might" have with it, but isn't that all part of the conversation?)
I meant neither you nor your experience any disrespect or harm. None in the slightest (Man, I was sure I worded that post carefully  !)
I'm really sorry, John, if I offended you. That was the exact opposite for which I was hoping.
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/12/2003 4:43 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
John, I thought it was more than clear that my experience was neither here nor there when it comes to the validity of the Baptism with the Spirit. I not only DIDN'T mean what you think I meant, but the exact opposite, namely that experience cannot justify the doctrine; the truth of the doctrine must come from Scripture's teaching. My experience means nothing in regard to the subject. Nothing at all. Further, I thought your experience was dead-on with Scripture's teaching. (I did note, though, one issue I "might" have with it, but isn't that all part of the conversation?)
I meant neither you nor your experience any disrespect or harm. None in the slightest (Man, I was sure I worded that post carefully !)
I'm really sorry, John, if I offended you. That was the exact opposite for which I was hoping.
Starkman
What irritated me was that you were trying to examine my experience, as if this were possible to do on the internet. I did not describe my experience to see who would think it was genuine or not.
I am just amazed that anyone can assume to be able to know someone else's heart (whether good or evil) like you appeared to be doing in your post, through the medium of the internet.
Now, if you had been with me when I experienced this, and had seen a change or the lack thereof in my life as a result of this experience, you would have more information on which to base your assessment of my experience. But again, doubting another's experience (or affirming it) proves nothing except that one feels one is both qualified and informed enough to judge another's experience (as evil OR good).
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
Edited by - John Earp on 07/12/2003 10:01:12 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/12/2003 5:31 PM (GMT -6) | | John,
Please, just go back and re-read what I wrote about your experience IN CONTEXT to what we've been talking about on this thread all along; understanding tongues in regard to what the manifestation really is (exactly what is going on when the Baptism take place in regard to what's being uttered) according to the teaching of Scripture. You gave your experience, scant and slim, yes, but nevertheless, you stated what you felt, what happened to you and what the Baptism has done and meant in your life. I simply noted that as far as WHAT WE HAD BEEN TALKING ABOUT in this thread, your experience matches with Scripture. I then added a general caution--a caution that had nothing to do with your experience and wasn't directed to you; how Satan attempts to fool some Christians by playing on their emotional experiences in order to lead the Christian to believe they have something that they don't. Nothing I said about your experienc, as far as I can tell, should be read to insinuate that you or your experience were the issue or that I was analyizing it. I was talking to Asher about tongues being used as a prayer language, that's all. After you posted your experience, I thought, "Now there's a wonderful example of how I think Scripture portrays the Baptism in the Spirit.
Again, John, I was only glad about your post; glad of it's SCRIPTURAL soundness. The personal part of it--what you literally experienced--wasn't at all the issue or of my concern to critique.
For reconcilation,
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/12/2003 5:54 PM (GMT -6) | | Dear Starkman,
I am not angry at you. I simply don't agree that you have enough information to make a judgment on another's experience in such a medium as the internet. Whether you affirm or deny another's experience really is immaterial to the real question of whether or not their experience was genuine. It is kind of you to say you think my description of my experience depicts a Scriptural experience; however, I personally don't think what you or anyone else but God thinks about my experience matters.
Again, I am not offended, just a bit amazed at what seemed to me to be presumption on your part that you are truly able to judge my experience as valid or not.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
Edited by - John Earp on 07/12/2003 10:55:39 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 7/13/2003 4:32 AM (GMT -6) | | TONGUES (The final authority!)
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
1Cr 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
1Cr 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
1Cr 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
1Cr 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
1Cr 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away.
1Cr 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
1Cr 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
1Cr 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
1Cr 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
1Cr 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
1Cr 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
1Cr 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
1Cr 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
UNKNOWN TONGUE (?)
1Cr 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
1Cr 14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
1Cr 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
1Cr 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.
1Cr 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
1Cr 14:19 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.
1Cr 14:27 If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret
From out here in left field, my Father looks masculine. - Me | | Back to Top | | |
|
rsirkel
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 183
| Posted 7/13/2003 10:57 AM (GMT -6) | | Tim
Nice post. Yes, it should be the final authority, but
1Cr 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
Ron Sirkel | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/13/2003 1:07 PM (GMT -6) | | Starkman,
As I reflected on this today, it occured to me that I very likely overreacted. I am sorry. No doubt my past (very negative) experience of people on the internet saying what I received was definitely not of God has tended to make me a bit touchy about my experience. Of course it does not matter who thinks what about my experience, and I probably should never have even posted it in the first place.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
| 52 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:45 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|