Tongues!

[lish1936]

I agree with you though. As a self-described Charismatic, I pull my hair out at fellow Charismatics who claim that everyone who receives the baptism in the Holy Spirit is supposed to speak in tongues.

As for equal fervor and other persuasions, I wasn't sure whether your point was about those who don't speak in tongues or those who haven't received the baptism in the Holy Spirit. My bottom line is that fervor and theological convictions are completely different issues from one's stance on tongues or the baptism. The same is true for spiritual maturity and a host of other issues.

The Corinthian church was fully charismatic, yet was a "mess" in many ways.

I believe being baptized in the Holy Spirit is normative. Yet, for whatever reason, God made it available as an event that can occur separately from salvation. Given that, there will be many Christians who never have this experience. They are not somehow "second class citizens."

No, I wasn't referring to "fervor" that implies intense feeling,or a special "power," but a strong commitment to the missional mandate that equals those who have had the tongue's experience.

Since you mentioned an "event," I'm not sure which of the following dogma causes you to "pull your hair out." From what you wrote, I think it's all but #3.

1) Tongues are over for today.
2) To be filled with the Holy Spirit one must speak in tongues.
3) One is filled with the Holy Spirit after conversion, but does not have to speak in tongues.
4) One is filled with the Holy Spirit during conversion.

Blessings,

Lillian

[swfdoc1]

Actually, I like to use the terms “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and “being baptized in/by the Holy Spirit” because I think “being filled with the Holy Spirit” is ambiguous. This ambiguity arises because (my theology is that) the Holy Spirit is active in the life of every Christian and that every Christian is “sealed” in the Holy Spirit at the time of salvation (Eph. 1:13) and that every Christian is a “partaker” of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 6:4) from salvation onward.

I believe that the baptism in the Holy Spirit can happen either at salvation (if instruction is given or if God sovereignly moves) OR as a separate later experience/event.

However, to answer your question directly, in context, my original comment was about fellow Charismatics who believe that every person who is Spirit-baptized MUST speak in tongues. That’s what I pull my hair out over.

Thus, I was not referring to your statement 1 as what causes me to pull my hair out (although it does), since a Charismatic wouldn’t say that. Your statement 2 is the closest, but it is backwards from my point. It puts tongue-speaking before Spirit-baptism. If you switch the order, that is what I was referring to. Your statement 3 would not make me pull my hair out (as you guessed) but for a different reason: it is ONE of TWO statements I would agree with (you can be baptized in the Spirit during OR after conversion and in either case you may not receive the gift of tongues). My response to your statement 4 is contained in much of the above, but is not what I was referring to.

But enough about my views on this “sub-subject.” Colin started us out by soliciting people’s views on the larger question. Paula asked a question about a key biblical text. Those things are much more interesting.

[lish1936]

As usual, Steve, you've given a clearly defined explanation. Thanks. Didn't mean to digress.

Lillian

[Paula22466]

Steve, I'm going to have to take your word for the correct interpretation of "God," in I Corinthians 14:2 because my understanding of that passage from Greek has reached its limit in this case. Thank you for your thoughtful response.

You touched on several points, but I'd like to ask you about this:

Anyway, we finally arrive at his “interpretation” of 14:2. The key to it (in addition to his cessationist bias) is that he believes Paul is writing sarcastically. I don’t buy it.

For example, in 1 Cor 14:6-12, would you agree Paul is using sarcasm, or at the very least a corrective tone sprinkled throughout? The Corinthians had evidently been abusing the true gift of tongues.

Also, Paul says, "seek to abound for the edification of the church," so why would people, as they still do to this day, diligently seek for this gift as if it were some sort of badge of uber-Christianity? (That drives me crazy).

What of 1 Cor 14:22, where Paul says, "So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers." And Paul goes on to say, if one does use tongues it should be done in very small groups. So, my question for you (or anyone who'd like to answer) is how can these people(the people who are still abusing the true gift), in good conscience, have outbursts of this "babbling," (that no one understands, including themselves) in church, or where ever else they please? If tongues are for a "sign to unbelievers," as the Apostle says, why would you even use it privately at all?

[swfdoc1]

For example, in 1 Cor 14:6-12, would you agree Paul is using sarcasm, or at the very least a corrective tone sprinkled throughout? The Corinthians had evidently been abusing the true gift of tongues.

I definitely think Paul is NOT being sarcastic in THIS passage. I do think he is being corrective (or at least instructive). If we want to see sarcasm, we can look at I Cor. 4:6-10. If I remember correctly, the guy whose stuff we were looking at cited this as an example of Paul’s sarcasm that should make us believe that he is being sarcastic in chapter 14. But the styles are entirely different—evidence that Pual is NOT being sarcastic in Chapter 14. This matters immensely, and is one of the major problems with the fellow’s handling of this passage. Consider the first part of 4:8. If Paul is serious, we have one meaning; since he is sarcastic we have the opposite meaning. Only by claiming that Paul is sarcastic in chapter 14 (and combining that with his other errors), can he get the “interpretation” he does. Paul is NOT sarcastic in I Cor. 14:5; he is serious: he wishes they all spoke in tongues!

Also, Paul says, "seek to abound for the edification of the church," so why would people, as they still do to this day, diligently seek for this gift as if it were some sort of badge of uber-Christianity? (That drives me crazy).

Well, Paul tells us to seek ALL the spiritual gifts. That includes tongues. Add to that the false (in my opinion) teaching that everyone who receives the baptism should automatically speak in tongues. You would not believe (actually you might) some of the goofy things I’ve seen people tell other people to do after praying for the baptism, if they did not automatically start speaking in tongues. Add to that that God in his sovereignty does seem, empirically, to give this gift more often than many others; we just see it more. In other words, people are seeking the baptism, but the result is often speaking in tongues. Add to that the possibility of faking it. In other words, a person doesn’t see any of the other gifts “operating” in their lives, so they force themselves to “speak in tongues,” even if it’s not real. And on and on.

What of 1 Cor 14:22, where Paul says, "So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers." And Paul goes on to say, if one does use tongues it should be done in very small groups. So, my question for you (or anyone who'd like to answer) is how can these people(the people who are still abusing the true gift), in good conscience, have outbursts of this "babbling," (that no one understands, including themselves) in church, or where ever else they please? If tongues are for a "sign to unbelievers," as the Apostle says, why would you even use it privately at all?

I see several questions here (and I’m not sure about the “small groups” part):

1) Re: outbursts of babbling: I don’t think it is babbling. I think it is a language. (See my first post on page 1 of this thread and see I Cor. 14:10-11.) Putting that aside, if you are referring to the practice in certain Pentecostal/Charismatic/Third Wave churches of many people speaking/singing in tongues at once; I think this should not be done. It sounds beautiful—which makes sense since many of the people may be speaking in the tongues of angels (see I Cor. 13:1). That doesn’t make it right. Most folks justify this by making a distinction between “speaking in tongues” and “praying/singing in the Spirit” and/or “using a personal prayer language.” Personally, I see these distinctions as invalid, and an excuse to ignore the proscriptions of I Cor. 14.

2) As far as “wherever they please,” that MAY very well be OK, since tongues are a sign to unbelievers. BUT this should be informed by I Cor. 14:21; otherwise it can be counterproductive.

3) As for private use, Paul’s instructions about tongues in public worship and tongues as a sign for unbelievers tells us nothing about what we should or shouldn’t do privately. Or at least, it tells us nothing directly. But within those passages, we see some reasons why we very well might want to use tongues privately. I Cor. 14:4 tells us that when we speak in tongues we edify ourselves. I Cor. 14:14 tells us that when we pray in a tongue, our spirits (lower case “s”) pray. I Cor. 14:15 tells us that when we speak in a tongue, we may be praying, singing, and/or blessing in the spirit. These are glorious, glorious experiences. I Cor. 14:18-19 may imply that Paul speaks in tongues in front of unbelievers or in church with interpretation, but it equally (at least) may imply that he speaks in tongues privately. Furthermore, Romans 8:26 may refer to praying in the Spirit (i.e., speaking in tongues). I believe it does. What a wonderful comfort that is.

That’s my 2 (I mean 4; I mean 6; I mean 8 . . . ) cents worth.

[Paula22466]

That’s my 2 (I mean 4; I mean 6; I mean 8 . . . ) cents worth.

Thanks Steve I have more questions, and not sure if there is enough biblical evidence to insist that speaking in tongues is relevant for today, as the op asked. That is, "tongues" which is used outside the context of speaking a language that someone else in the speaker's presence can understand. I wish I had more time currently, but I don't. I do plan on checking back in asap.

[jo555]

The Bible records that the people of God would speak in other tongues. Do you think this is relevant for the modern-day Church?

Yes, and I believe there is enough evidence in the bible to take that stand. Although, as Paul stresses in Corinthians, more relevant to walk in love / fruits of the Spirit.

Whether everyone should speak in tongues for personal edification...not sure. In the book of Acts, if I recall correctly, it was seen as a sort of evidence of having received the Holy Spirit. Yet, in other books, it appears that it may not be for everyone...I don't know. Overall, I believe that all Christians can have this gift, but just because one is not speaking in tongues, doesn't mean they are not filled with the Holy Spirit.

[colin nielsen]

Speaking in tongues was the only way I could get rid of an evil spirit attacking my daughter.

[Shann]

I usually stay out of these discussions because I'm not comfortable enough with my knowledge to entertain an opinion. (Part of my illness has affected a lot of neurological activity and I have a difficult time remembering) but I thought I'd share my initials thoughts.

My son was involved in a camp one summer where every single person who spoke would speak in tongues. We had a disagreement at the time because I found it to be a bit hokey. I've been going to camps and retreats and churches my whole life and had never experienced anyone speaking in tongues. The fact that everyone there could do it on command made me nervous but I had to be careful in how I presented my nervousness to my son as I didn't want to push him away.

Apparently I handled it correctly because he later agreed that it didn't seem genuine but more of a way to lure people in Now he is at Duke studying for his Master's in Divinity and has started the long process of becoming a United Methodist minister.

I do believe one time at a small healing service I did actually witness someone who was praying for me speak in tongues but it took me 46 years to hear it. So many people desperately want to speak in tongues and I don't get that at all.

During Bible Study once, a lady mentioned that she prays diligently to speak in tongues. I know my minister said something relevant about it and pointed out her many other gifts. Now at this point, I had known this lady for a while and she always struck me as a bit grumpy. However, I could feel God nudging me to speak to her so I leaned over and said maybe you do want to speak in tongues but I think God may have had a different gift in mind for you and that is speaking with your eyes. When you get passionate about something your eyes sparkle and it cause a chill to run down my back.

I was speaking the truth, I didn't see that sparkle all the time but I had seen it before and I also felt strongly that God was asking me to say this to her. (I even argued silently for a bit with him but then relented and said it aloud)

The gist of that story is now every time I see this lady her eyes do sparkle and she gives me the most divine hugs I've received since my Mom died. I don't see her as a grumpy old lady at all, maybe a lonely lady but a lady filled with the Holy Spirit and now someone very important to me. If by listening to God and praying before I said something to her is considered a gift in the Spirit then for me, I feel that is way more important than wanting to speak in tongues. It may sound silly to hear speaking with your eyes and it's probably not in the Bible but I am positive it made a huge difference in at least two people's lives that night (maybe more because I suspect others have seen my lovely little old lady in a new light and not as the grumpy lonely lady she was before.)

I hope I haven't trailed too far of the topic but what I'm trying to say is we all have gifts from the spirit and I do think that many people think speaking in tongues may make you a better Christian but I think whatever gifts God gives you, know that he knows you best and knows what those you come in contact need the most and he provides just that--as long as we remain willing and open-minded.

[Colswann1]

Speaking in tongues was the only way I could get rid of an evil spirit attacking my daughter.

Yes Colin, I feel there is power in the use of tongues. Paul indicated that he used them more than anyone else, but just in his private life, as a self edification gift (it's the only one specified with this quality). I use the gift when I've picked up baggage and I need the weight lifting (works for me!). When Jesus washed his disciples feet he said that they were clean but needed a feet wash because of their journeying. I believe that is like the Christian walk, we get our spiritual feet grubby as we journey, and for me, tongues applied in private can be used as a cleaning up gift.

My son was involved in a camp one summer where every single person who spoke would speak in tongues. We had a disagreement at the time because I found it to be a bit hokey.

Shann, thanks for sharing, it was interesting what you wrote. Paul indicated that tongue misuse could cause people to think we are mad (he agrees with your assessment). That is by every one blurting out in tongues at the same time in the house of God. He instructed that just a few and no more than three should speak out in the fellowship and only if they where interpreted. When tongues are interpreted they are almost like prophesy but not quite. Because when speaking in a tongue one is speaking directly to God whereas prophecy if speaking directly to the Body of Christ.