How can you deny speaking in tongues is a gift for today?

[PaladinGirl]

Hi everyone. How can Baptists deny that speaking in tongues is for today when the Bible clearly says that it will exist until that which is perfect (Jesus) is come? :confused:

1 Corinthians 13:1 KJV 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.

1 Corinthians 13:2 KJV And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:3 KJV And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:4 KJV Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

1 Corinthians 13:5 KJV Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

1 Corinthians 13:6 KJV Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

1 Corinthians 13:7 KJV Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

1 Corinthians 13:8 KJV 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.

1 Corinthians 13:9 KJV For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

1 Corinthians 13:10 KJV But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

[Holyroller125]

Hi everyone. How can Baptists deny that speaking in tongues is for today when the Bible clearly says that it will exist until that which is perfect (Jesus) is come? :confused:

1 Corinthians 13:1 KJV 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.

1 Corinthians 13:2 KJV And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:3 KJV And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:4 KJV Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

1 Corinthians 13:5 KJV Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

1 Corinthians 13:6 KJV Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

1 Corinthians 13:7 KJV Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

1 Corinthians 13:8 KJV 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.

1 Corinthians 13:9 KJV For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

1 Corinthians 13:10 KJV But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
I concur and well said.

I used to be Baptist and heavily taught against Pentecostalism and speaking in tongues. Now, I am a spirit-filled tongue talking Apostolic minister. Now, there is one thing to be unlearned about it. However, those of you that willingly reject the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire with evidencal tongues, I believe that means someone has issues with God. The issue is not with a particular denomination, why do you scorn at God and the Holy Ghost? What kind of child says I love you Jesus and rejects the gifts? To reject the gift in essence still rejects the gift giver.

Some only want a giver and some only want to consume the gifts, but hardly seldom do people accept all of what God has in store for them.

God Bless,

Gregory Paul Norton

[DeaconDean]

One of the more stupidier responses to this same question earlier, in another thread was,

when Jesus said "It is finished," that stopped it (speaking in tongues).

Geez, gemme a break.

If the gift of tongues stopped then, why did it come upon the disciples and others in the upper room at Pentecost?

If it stopped when Jesus said "It is finished" why would Paul teach the Corinthians to look forward to something in the past that had ended?

Geez, gimme a break.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[Holyroller125]

One of the more stupidier responses to this same question earlier, in another thread was,

when Jesus said "It is finished," that stopped it (speaking in tongues).

Geez, gemme a break.

If the gift of tongues stopped then, why did it come upon the disciples and others in the upper room at Pentecost?

If it stopped when Jesus said "It is finished" why would Paul teach the Corinthians to look forward to something in the past that had ended?

Geez, gimme a break.

God Bless

Till all are one.
Very valid statements brother.

One solution is to stop prooftexting the Holy Scriptures to death.

God Bless,
Greg Norton

[Behe's Boy]

I for one do not believe that the gifts have ceased - and full-heartedly believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

I disagree with those pentacostals who teach that the Baptism in the Holy Spirity HAS to be evidenced by speaking in toungues. Athough the gift of toungues is real and a wonderful gift - nowhere in the Bible does it say it is a mandatory evidence for the Baptism of the Spirit.

[DeaconDean]

I disagree with those pentacostals who teach that the Baptism in the Holy Spirity HAS to be evidenced by speaking in toungues. Athough the gift of toungues is real and a wonderful gift - nowhere in the Bible does it say it is a mandatory evidence for the Baptism of the Spirit.

I have an ex brother-in-law whom I think very much of, he was raised in the Pentecostal/Charismatic way. He and I both are of the same conclusion that Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not always evidenced by the "speaking in tongues."

Let me explain, John 16:8 says:

"And when he is come, he wil reprove the world of sin,"

And who is the "He?" Why the Holy Spirit.

Jesus and God both teach that sin lies in the heart. And Jn. 6:44 clearly teaches that no man comes to God unless it is the Father that draws Him first.

For a person to come to God, the Holy Spirit has to be working from within to convict the heart of sin. Can't do it outside, but from within. And once convicted, the Holy Spirit, who is God, then leads him/her to God.

This evidence here shows that a person whom the Holy Spirit is working on, already has the Holy Spirit in them. not as a permenant resident though, but the Spirit is already working within.

So how can one be "baptized" in the Spirit, when the Spirit is already within?

Doesn't make sense to this individual.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[Behe's Boy]

DD -

I know where you are coming from on this -

I'm not totally decided on where I stand on the Baptism in The Spirit issue (as in being seperate from convervsion). But I can definately say from a Biblical stand-point toungues are not a requirement one way or the other.

[dayhiker]

I look for the evidence of speaking in tongues when I pray for someone to receiver the girt of the Holy Spirit because that in the one evidence that I see in each of the occurances in the Book of Acts.

[Holyroller125]

I have an ex brother-in-law whom I think very much of, he was raised in the Pentecostal/Charismatic way. He and I both are of the same conclusion that Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not always evidenced by the "speaking in tongues."

Let me explain, John 16:8 says:

"And when he is come, he wil reprove the world of sin,"

And who is the "He?" Why the Holy Spirit.

Jesus and God both teach that sin lies in the heart. And Jn. 6:44 clearly teaches that no man comes to God unless it is the Father that draws Him first.

For a person to come to God, the Holy Spirit has to be working from within to convict the heart of sin. Can't do it outside, but from within. And once convicted, the Holy Spirit, who is God, then leads him/her to God.

This evidence here shows that a person whom the Holy Spirit is working on, already has the Holy Spirit in them. not as a permenant resident though, but the Spirit is already working within.

So how can one be "baptized" in the Spirit, when the Spirit is already within?

Doesn't make sense to this individual.

Of course, the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire with evidencal tongues is not ever going to make sense in the natural alone.

God Bless

Till all are one.

DD -

I know where you are coming from on this -

I'm not totally decided on where I stand on the Baptism in The Spirit issue (as in being seperate from convervsion). But I can definately say from a Biblical stand-point toungues are not a requirement one way or the other.

I look for the evidence of speaking in tongues when I pray for someone to receiver the girt of the Holy Spirit because that in the one evidence that I see in each of the occurances in the Book of Acts.

No sequential-seperate to doctrine in the Bible. Please read Luke and Acts together. Someone can be drawn to God. However, the person has to accept the gift of the Holy Ghost to be considered a son of the Father or one is still an illegitimate orphaned child sitting on a church pew.

And, I concur about the evidence. Tongues is the initial evidence, but it is not the only evidence.

God Bless,

Gregory Paul Norton

[Behe's Boy]

I look for the evidence of speaking in tongues when I pray for someone to receiver the girt of the Holy Spirit because that in the one evidence that I see in each of the occurances in the Book of Acts.

Not in every occurance. Check out Acts 8:14-17. You have folks receiving the Holy Spirit but the gift of tongues is not specified as being the evidence for it.

[Holyroller125]

Not in every occurance. Check out Acts 8:14-17. You have folks receiving the Holy Spirit but the gift of tongues is not specified as being the evidence for it.
In Acts 8:14-17, the Apostles knew that they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and at the same time, the Apostles knew that they did not receive the Baptism of the Holy Ghost yet. Why, the evidence was not their, such as speaking in tongues. Other Biblical scholars, even outside of Pentecost, agree with this stance on the passages you quoted.

God Bless,
Greg Norton

[mlqurgw]

No sequential-seperate to doctrine in the Bible. Please read Luke and Acts together. Someone can be drawn to God. However, the person has to accept the gift of the Holy Ghost to be considered a son of the Father or one is still an illegitimate orphaned child sitting on a church pew.

And, I concur about the evidence. Tongues is the initial evidence, but it is not the only evidence.

God Bless,

Gregory Paul NortonIf you have to accept it it is not a gift it is an offer. The difference is subtle but very important. If I give you a gift I am the one who makes it yours. It becomes your possession by my act not yours. If I only offer you something it doesn't become yours until you accept it. You make it your possession when you accept it. The Gospel of salvation is never represented in the Scripture as an offer but as a gift. The gifts of the Spirit are never said to be offers but gifts. It isn't up to you but up to Him.

If I can find it I will post something I wrote about why I am a cessationist. I believe it to be valid Biblical reasons apart from the use of 1Cor. 13:10.

[mlqurgw]

Why I am a cessationist. I admit that much of this comes from “ Signs of the Apostles” by Walter Chantry. He is not my only source but he did help shape my views. I also read many Pentecostal pages on the subject and found almost all of them saying pretty much the same thing. Only that the gifts had not ceased but not giving any real reason why. I also studied some Pentecostal history and was convinced that the modern day gifts were absent until about the 1800’s. Most of those who hold to modern day gifts trace their history to the so-called Azusa Street Revival which took place between 1906 to 1913.
Now to look at the way miracles and signs were used in the Scriptures.
Joseph was the first to receive extraordinary gifts from God. He didn’t work miracles but did do things that were not common. His gifts involved delivering divinely revealed truth. He was a Prophet of God.

Next we have Moses, the first to work miracles. His miracles were given as a sign that he came from God and spoke from God. This principle applies to all Old Testament miracles in that they were done as a sign that the one doing them was a Prophet from God and spoke for God. When they were done it was expected that the inspired word of God was to be spoken.

The miracles of Jesus are next in our study. His miracles were primarily to show His authority as the Prophet of God.

Joh 10:37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
Joh 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Joh 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
Joh 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: The miracles of the Apostles testified to their authority as God’s prophets, they who spoke the revelation of God.

Heb 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Heb 2:4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
New Testament miracles are, in Scripture, viewed as God’s stamp of approval on the message of the Apostles.

Ordinary Christians and gifts. Every recorded instance of men receiving these gifts were under the direct ministry of an Apostle.

This brings me to the conclusion that no true servent of Christ will be given power to work miracles unless he is directly associated with bring fresh revelation from God. They are given as signs of God to show He sent the ones performing miracles and we should expect to hear from God when they are done. There are no more Apostles as there are no more that saw and heard directly from Christ as did those who gave us the Scriptures. Also to believe that men today receive a fresh revelation from God is to say the Scriptures are not sufficient.

As to tongues I will write on those some other time.

[Holyroller125]

If you have to accept it it is not a gift it is an offer. The difference is subtle but very important. If I give you a gift I am the one who makes it yours. It becomes your possession by my act not yours. If I only offer you something it doesn't become yours until you accept it. You make it your possession when you accept it. The Gospel of salvation is never represented in the Scripture as an offer but as a gift. The gifts of the Spirit are never said to be offers but gifts. It isn't up to you but up to Him.

If I can find it I will post something I wrote about why I am a cessationist. I believe it to be valid Biblical reasons apart from the use of 1Cor. 13:10.
I agree with you on a large extent.

I concur that salvation is a gift: Eph. 2:8-9. Now, if salvation is a gift rather than an offer, an offer is something you accept, and salvation is a gift. Why do a lot of people who are cessationalist preach: "Just [ACCEPT] Jesus as your saviour." According to this, salvation is an offer and not a gift because the minister [only] preaches [accept] Jesus. Sounds like a contradiction to me.

God Bless,

Gregory Paul Norton

[mlqurgw]

I agree with you on a large extent.

I concur that salvation is a gift: Eph. 2:8-9. Now, if salvation is a gift rather than an offer, an offer is something you accept, and salvation is a gift. Why do a lot of people who are cessationalist preach: "Just [ACCEPT] Jesus as your saviour." According to this, salvation is an offer and not a gift because the minister [only] preaches [accept] Jesus. Sounds like a contradiction to me.

God Bless,

Gregory Paul Norton
Quite true, it is a contradiction. That is why I brought it up. Obviously I am not one of those preachers. ;)
It truly greives me that so many preachers are doing uch a disservice to the souls of men and women. It has nothing to do with cessationism though but with foundational theology. When men believe that it is man who makes the decision rather than God they will preach to man in a manner that is man centered. They will call on men to do something that it is not in his power to do. I am not a cessationist because I hold to the Doctrines of Grace but because I believe it is both Biblical and historically true.

[Behe's Boy]

In Acts 8:14-17, the Apostles knew that they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and at the same time, the Apostles knew that they did not receive the Baptism of the Holy Ghost yet. Why, the evidence was not their, such as speaking in tongues. Other Biblical scholars, even outside of Pentecost, agree with this stance on the passages you quoted.

God Bless,
Greg Norton

Name one scholar outside of an AOG context that agrees with this assessment.

Two Scholars that hold to my view are - Dr. Wayne Grudem and Dr. Sam Storms.

Doesn't matter who holds to what view anyway - bottom line - Acts 8:14-17 gives an instance of people receiving the Baptism of the HS and not evidencing it by speaking in toungues. The Baptism does occur yet tounges is not mentioned.

[Behe's Boy]

Acts 4:26-31 - another instance of being filled with the spirit without the specific mention of tongues being evidenced.

[PaladinGirl]

Acts 4:26-31 - another instance of being filled with the spirit without the specific mention of tongues being evidenced.
I do believe that a person can be filled with the Spirit without the evidence of tongues. I do not believe that the gift of tongues is for everybody and I don't even know if it is for today or not.

[Holyroller125]

Name one scholar outside of an AOG context that agrees with this assessment.

Two Scholars that hold to my view are - Dr. Wayne Grudem and Dr. Sam Storms.

Doesn't matter who holds to what view anyway - bottom line - Acts 8:14-17 gives an instance of people receiving the Baptism of the HS and not evidencing it by speaking in toungues. The Baptism does occur yet tounges is not mentioned.
Specifally, the water baptism occured but not the spiritual baptism to be exact. Also, if Acts 8:14-17 is going to be used as a conversion experience; I believe it needs to be preached more often across Christianity rather than left on the shelf without any exposition corporately. Why does Christianity have to act so insecure to hear this text from behind the pulpit whether you believe the "evidencal tongues" was present or not during this conversion experience?
Greg Norton

[Holyroller125]

I do believe that a person can be filled with the Spirit without the evidence of tongues. I do not believe that the gift of tongues is for everybody and I don't even know if it is for today or not.
First, the difference is the gift of the Holy Ghost w/evidencal tongues and the gift of tongues which is a corporate ministry. The Baptism of the Holy Ghost itiniates one into covenant, and the gift of tongues is for a corporate meeting.

I concur that the "gift of tongues" is not for everybody. On the other hand, every Christian should want to be spirit-filled according to Acts 2. Again, how can one say "I accept Jesus, and yet, willingly reject the baptism of the Holy Ghost?

Greg Norton

[Holyroller125]

Acts 4:26-31 - another instance of being filled with the spirit without the specific mention of tongues being evidenced.
I agree with you on a large extent. Just because the "evidence" was not mentioned is not enough to minimize it, act scared to preach it, act scared to share it in only "a few selected services," or act scared when visitors show up. Why does Christianity act ashamed of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and the essence, substance, and character of God right in our church [buildings] and corporate meetings? Nevertheless, if I know the precepts and basics of an experience, I do not have to repeat every single solitary detail everytime. I know that "evidencal tongues" occured in at least three of the witnesses in the book of Acts. That is enough for me. Luke and Acts were given as a detailed account to privilege a theological slant that Luke had (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-3). Even so, compared to the accounts in Acts 4 and 8 along with other accounts in the Lukan corpus, collectively, all experiences should include an acknowledgement of Jesus Christ with the response to repent for the forsaking of our sins, baptism in Jesus' name for the remission of sins, and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire with evidencal tongues to seal us as an adopted sanctified child in Him.

For Dr. Wayne Gruden, I would not quote him in my research because I do not believe his Systematic Theology textbook is solid enough for graduate school. I tend to look for more solid theology texts to quote, even outside of Pentecost. For anyone, I disagree about writing a book for mere proposition and propaganda. A novice might buy into it, but any person that is heavily into reading the Bible cover-to-cover, over-and-over again, and who is also evaluating many numerous scholars, even across theological disciplines, would more likely not.

God Bless,
Greg Norton

[Behe's Boy]

I agree with you on a large extent. Just because the "evidence" was not mentioned is not enough to minimize it, act scared to preach it, act scared to share it in only "a few selected services," or act scared when visitors show up. Why does Christianity act ashamed of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and the essence, substance, and character of God right in our church [buildings] and corporate meetings? Nevertheless, if I know the precepts and basics of an experience, I do not have to repeat every single solitary detail everytime. I know that "evidencal tongues" occured in at least three of the witnesses in the book of Acts. That is enough for me. Luke and Acts were given as a detailed account to privilege a theological slant that Luke had (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-3). Even so, compared to the accounts in Acts 4 and 8 along with other accounts in the Lukan corpus, collectively, all experiences should include an acknowledgement of Jesus Christ with the response to repent for the forsaking of our sins, baptism in Jesus' name for the remission of sins, and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire with evidencal tongues to seal us as an adopted sanctified child in Him.

But regardless of any of this - there are instances (which you admit to) where the Gifts of the Holy Spirit are received without the evidence of tongues. Bottom line for me is - that it is not a requirement to evidence the gift. If it were a bonifide requirement to have this "evidence" then surely Paul would have mentioned it in 1 Corinthians 12 and 13. In fact - as I recall - Paul even minimizes the gift in chapter 13 when he says if he speaks in toungues and has not love then he is nothing more than a clanging symbol.

Here is one problem with this doctrine. Any person who does not "evidence" the gift will get labeled as a 2nd class Christian. I know from experience - having spent many years in the Assembly of God Church including being baptised in the AOG church. This is not limited to one church either. Being active duty military I had to move every three years and hence have spent some time in many different AOG churches - the result always being the same.

For Dr. Wayne Gruden, I would not quote him in my research because I do not believe his Systematic Theology textbook is solid enough for graduate school. I tend to look for more solid theology texts to quote, even outside of Pentecost. For anyone, I disagree about writing a book for mere proposition and propaganda. A novice might buy into it, but any person that is heavily into reading the Bible cover-to-cover, over-and-over again, and who is also evaluating many numerous scholars, even across theological disciplines, would more likely not.


Have you ever read "Systematic Theology" by Grudem?
Have you ever read anything else by Grudem?

In regards to "Systematic Theology" he makes no bones about the fact that it is written for the layperson. Personally I don't have a problem with this - being a layperson myself. I think your comment about ST being written for "mere proposition" and "propoganda" is way off base.

Oh - btw - please name me one theologian outside of the AOG church that holds to your view that the Baptism of the HS is evidenced by tongues. I don't think you can - but please feel free to respond.

[franky67]

mlqurgw.foru.ms (http://mlqurgw.foru.ms/)
This brings me to the conclusion that no true servent of Christ will be given power to work miracles unless he is directly associated with bring fresh revelation from God. They are given as signs of God to show He sent the ones performing miracles and we should expect to hear from God when they are done. There are no more Apostles as there are no more that saw and heard directly from Christ as did those who gave us the Scriptures. Also to believe that men today receive a fresh revelation from God is to say the Scriptures are not sufficient.

Please give your understanding of the meaning of "the perfect" in 1 Cor 13:10

Your belief,sufficient scripture, being the reason for no one today receiving a word from God, What about the OT Saints?
They had the Torah and yet God still spoke to prophets to lead the people in the right direction. Does that mean the Torah was not sufficient ?

If preachers today don't have a word from God, then why should they preach, we don't need man's ideas for living, he might as well just stand behind the pulpit and read his bible to the congregation.

Romans 15:8 says that Jesus came as a servant to the Jews to confirm the promises given to the Fathers.

Jesus healed and delivered, not primarily to prove who He was, but to confirm the blessings of Abraham. This is shown by the words of Jesus in luke 13:16, when He healed the daughter of Abraham as He called her, and then He said she deserved it because of the Abrahamic Covenant.

He called healing the "children's bread", ie, a blessing of the covenant.

IMHO cessationists are missing the big picture, and that is ....
As fully explained in Galatians chapter 3, God made a covenant with Abraham and his seed who is Christ, The new covenant is the Abrahamic Covenant sealed by the very Blood of God on the cross, and we who are in Christ are Abraham's offspring, are heirs to all the blessings of the covenant according to Galatians 3:29

Those blessings include not only salvation, but all the other promises as well.

God has always cared for all the needs of His people here on this earth, and in the age to come.

Psalm 91 says "I will satisfy him with a long life, and let him behold my salvation."

Psalm 23, "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the House of the Lord forever."

You're saying God means nothing to us now but fire insurance. Why even bother to pray if that's the case ?

Nothing for us here on earth at all until we die ?

[mlqurgw]

Please give your understanding of the meaning of "the perfect" in 1 Cor 13:10

Your belief,sufficient scripture, being the reason for no one today receiving a word from God, What about the OT Saints?
They had the Torah and yet God still spoke to prophets to lead the people in the right direction. Does that mean the Torah was not sufficient ?

If preachers today don't have a word from God, then why should they preach, we don't need man's ideas for living, he might as well just stand behind the pulpit and read his bible to the congregation.

Romans 15:8 says that Jesus came as a servant to the Jews to confirm the promises given to the Fathers.

Jesus healed and delivered, not primarily to prove who He was, but to confirm the blessings of Abraham. This is shown by the words of Jesus in luke 13:16, when He healed the daughter of Abraham as He called her, and then He said she deserved it because of the Abrahamic Covenant.

He called healing the "children's bread", ie, a blessing of the covenant.

IMHO cessationists are missing the big picture, and that is ....
As fully explained in Galatians chapter 3, God made a covenant with Abraham and his seed who is Christ, The new covenant is the Abrahamic Covenant sealed by the very Blood of God on the cross, and we who are in Christ are Abraham's offspring, are heirs to all the blessings of the covenant according to Galatians 3:29

Those blessings include not only salvation, but all the other promises as well.

God has always cared for all the needs of His people here on this earth, and in the age to come.

Psalm 91 says "I will satisfy him with a long life, and let him behold my salvation."

Psalm 23, "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the House of the Lord forever."

You're saying God means nothing to us now but fire insurance. Why even bother to pray if that's the case ?

Nothing for us here on earth at all until we die ?
If you read my post you will know that nothing in my argument is based on an interpretation of 1Cor. 13:10 and the meaning of the word perfect. The fact is that no one can be honestly dogmatic on what the word is referring to in the verse and context. The simple meaning of the word is complete or mature. It could be speaking of the mature church, the Scriptures or even to Christ among several possible inferences. That is why I didn't base my argument on it.
Do preachers have a word from God? No. They have a message from God. That message is the proclamation of Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures. We do not speak by the inspiration of the Spirit but by the illumination of the Spirit the message of the Scriptures. As I have shown in my argument the miraculous gifts were given as a sign that the one through whom they were performed was speaking by the direct inspiration of God. Whether 1Cor. 13:10 is referring to the complete Scriptures or not is of no consequence in the determination of whether cessationism is Biblical. The fact is that we do have the complete canon of Scriptures which were written by men who did speak by the inspiration of God. Do you believe that the Scriptures are not sufficient or complete?
I will get to the rest of your post later. I have had little sleep and right now need a nap. Suffice for the moment to say that your accusations are baseless.

[franky67]

If you read my post you will know that nothing in my argument is based on an interpretation of 1Cor. 13:10 and the meaning of the word perfect. The fact is that no one can be honestly dogmatic on what the word is referring to in the verse and context. The simple meaning of the word is complete or mature. It could be speaking of the mature church, the Scriptures or even to Christ among several possible inferences. That is why I didn't base my argument on it.
Do preachers have a word from God? No. They have a message from God. That message is the proclamation of Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures. We do not speak by the inspiration of the Spirit but by the illumination of the Spirit the message of the Scriptures. As I have shown in my argument the miraculous gifts were given as a sign that the one through whom they were performed was speaking by the direct inspiration of God. Whether 1Cor. 13:10 is referring to the complete Scriptures or not is of no consequence in the determination of whether cessationism is Biblical. The fact is that we do have the complete canon of Scriptures which were written by men who did speak by the inspiration of God. Do you believe that the Scriptures are not sufficient or complete?
I will get to the rest of your post later. I have had little sleep and right now need a nap. Suffice for the moment to say that your accusations are baseless.


But what scripture says that cessationism is anything but a man's doctrine ?

[franky67]

Why I am a cessationist. I admit that much of this comes from “ Signs of the Apostles” by Walter Chantry. He is not my only source but he did help shape my views. I also read many Pentecostal pages on the subject and found almost all of them saying pretty much the same thing. Only that the gifts had not ceased but not giving any real reason why. I also studied some Pentecostal history and was convinced that the modern day gifts were absent until about the 1800’s. Most of those who hold to modern day gifts trace their history to the so-called Azusa Street Revival which took place between 1906 to 1913.
Now to look at the way miracles and signs were used in the Scriptures.
Joseph was the first to receive extraordinary gifts from God. He didn’t work miracles but did do things that were not common. His gifts involved delivering divinely revealed truth. He was a Prophet of God.

Next we have Moses, the first to work miracles. His miracles were given as a sign that he came from God and spoke from God. This principle applies to all Old Testament miracles in that they were done as a sign that the one doing them was a Prophet from God and spoke for God. When they were done it was expected that the inspired word of God was to be spoken.

The miracles of Jesus are next in our study. His miracles were primarily to show His authority as the Prophet of God.

Joh 10:37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
Joh 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Joh 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
Joh 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: The miracles of the Apostles testified to their authority as God’s prophets, they who spoke the revelation of God.

Heb 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Heb 2:4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
New Testament miracles are, in Scripture, viewed as God’s stamp of approval on the message of the Apostles.

Ordinary Christians and gifts. Every recorded instance of men receiving these gifts were under the direct ministry of an Apostle.

This brings me to the conclusion that no true servent of Christ will be given power to work miracles unless he is directly associated with bring fresh revelation from God. They are given as signs of God to show He sent the ones performing miracles and we should expect to hear from God when they are done. There are no more Apostles as there are no more that saw and heard directly from Christ as did those who gave us the Scriptures. Also to believe that men today receive a fresh revelation from God is to say the Scriptures are not sufficient.

As to tongues I will write on those some other time.


I have read all of the above, and nothing there changes the wording of Mark 16:17,18

It says "And these signs will accompany those who have believed; ....."

It does not say "And these signs will accompany those who have heard directly from Me and have believed...."

[mlqurgw]

But what scripture says that cessationism is anything but a man's doctrine ? What Scripture specifically says that Christ was our substitute? Yet it is a Biblical doctrine. The fact that the Scriptures do no make specific statements concerning a subject doesn't mean it doesn't teach it. The word trinity isn't in the Scriptures either does that mean they don't teach about the Trinity? You might notice that the first sentence of my post states that I am showing why I am a cessationist not why you should be. I gave what I am convinced to be the teaching of the Scriptures concerning miraculous gifts. You have attempted to sidetrack dealing with that teaching with straw men and red herring arguments. Either refute what I actually said or not but please don't waste mine and others time with refuting an argument I never made.

[mlqurgw]

I have read all of the above, and nothing there changes the wording of Mark 16:17,18

It says "And these signs will accompany those who have believed; ....."

It does not say "And these signs will accompany those who have heard directly from Me and have believed...."Which of course did happen as can be seen from Acts. But that in no way means that those things will continue. The passage doesn't speak to whether those things will follow every believer nor how long they will follow. It simply states that they will and they did. Actually the passage goes to further my argument as they are signs not blessings. What are they signs of?

[franky67]

What Scripture specifically says that Christ was our substitute? Yet it is a Biblical doctrine. The fact that the Scriptures do no make specific statements concerning a subject doesn't mean it doesn't teach it. The word trinity isn't in the Scriptures either does that mean they don't teach about the Trinity? You might notice that the first sentence of my post states that I am showing why I am a cessationist not why you should be. I gave what I am convinced to be the teaching of the Scriptures concerning miraculous gifts. You have attempted to sidetrack dealing with that teaching with straw men and red herring arguments. Either refute what I actually said or not but please don't waste mine and others time with refuting an argument I never made.

Christ Our substitute ? John 1:29,36 Rev. ch 7,14,19, and any other scripture that speaks of the Lamb of God.

Trinity ? any scripture that mentions Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,

If The likes of Paul, Peter, Barnabas, Timothy, needed God to confirm their word with signs and miracles, how much more do we need it today.

When the power of the Gospel subsided, and the church got into politics, and God removed His hand, the religious had to come up with a doctrine that explained the lack of power.

You say the bible is sufficient, then use it.

When Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesians, he wasn't talking about just the Apostles who had power , but to all believers who have received the riches and glory of His inheritance in the saints. And what is the surpassing greatness of His power towards us who believe.

My friend you're walking way below where God wants you to walk.

I won't waste any more of my time or your's.

[mlqurgw]

Christ Our substitute ? John 1:29,36 Rev. ch 7,14,19, and any other scripture that speaks of the Lamb of God.

Trinity ? any scripture that mentions Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Which is exactly my point, which you obviously missed. You asked for a passage that speaks specifically that the gifts have ceased and I showed that though the Scriptures do not specifically say it they teach it as I have shown previously.

If The likes of Paul, Peter, Barnabas, Timothy, needed God to confirm their word with signs and miracles, how much more do we need it today They didn't have the complete canon as we do. They were in the process of completing it. They did have the Old Testament which contains the whole message but in types and shadows that were very misunderstood by the masses. They were given the gifts as a sign that we no longer need as we have the complete revelation of God. The signs were to confirm they were speaking by the inspiration of God. Do you know of any who do so today?

When the power of the Gospel subsided, and the church got into politics, and God removed His hand, the religious had to come up with a doctrine that explained the lack of power. Nonsense. The power of the Gospel is the same today as it has always been. The fact that most today don't believe that the Gospel is enough is the reason they have devised all manner of methods to evangelize. You misuse the word power in this context. You make it to mean something that isn't even implied in either text it is stated. Rom. 1:16, 1Cor. 1:18,24.

You say the bible is sufficient, then use it. I did and you have ignored it. Instead of dealing with the Scriptures I used you sought to argue against an argument I never made.

When Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesians, he wasn't talking about just the Apostles who had power , but to all believers who have received the riches and glory of His inheritance in the saints. And what is the surpassing greatness of His power towards us who believe. True. But that passage is speaking about resurrection power not gifts. The context determines what the power is in each particular instance it is used. It is called proper exegesis. To apply the word power indiscriminately to mean whatever you want is to not give due diligence to the context.

My friend you're walking way below where God wants you to walk. By whose standard? You assume to know far more about me than you have a right to express.

I won't waste any more of my time or your's.Good.

[Behe's Boy]

Do preachers have a word from God? No. They have a message from God. That message is the proclamation of Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures. We do not speak by the inspiration of the Spirit but by the illumination of the Spirit the message of the Scriptures. As I have shown in my argument the miraculous gifts were given as a sign that the one through whom they were performed was speaking by the direct inspiration of God. Whether 1Cor. 13:10 is referring to the complete Scriptures or not is of no consequence in the determination of whether cessationism is Biblical. The fact is that we do have the complete canon of Scriptures which were written by men who did speak by the inspiration of God. Do you believe that the Scriptures are not sufficient or complete?


This argument might - and I stress "might" - hold water in regards to the gift of prophecy or prophetic utterance. But not in regards to other gifts such as healing. It doesn't make the case that ALL gifts have ceased. Especially in light of I Corinthians 12 which gives the church detailed instructions on how to practice them.

Sorry to say if the gifts were for the apostles only (the only folks who wrote/spoke from direct inspiriation the canon) - then I seriously doubt Paul would give the church at Corinth (the most jacked up early chuch of them all) detailed instructions on how to go about using them.

[franky67]

Quote:
When Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesians, he wasn't talking about just the Apostles who had power , but to all believers who have received the riches and glory of His inheritance in the saints. And what is the surpassing greatness of His power towards us who believe.
True. But that passage is speaking about resurrection power not gifts. The context determines what the power is in each particular instance it is used. It is called proper exegesis. To apply the word power indiscriminately to mean whatever you want is to not give due diligence to the context.

I said I'd quit, but I just can't ignore this one.

This word power is all through Ephesians chapters 1,2,3, and Paul is saying it's the same power that raised Jesus from the dead. He did not say it's only to be used to raise US from the dead.

The context of all three chapters is about the power given to those Ephesians , and any one else in Christ, IF they will receive it.

3:20 Ephesians
"Now to HIM who is able to do exceeding abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us." How plain can this be?

I won't quote all three chapters, I urge you to read it for your self.

Yes, it's resurrection power, but we don,t use it to resurrect ourselves. God uses the empowered gifts, through us, to do the work He gives us to do.

[mlqurgw]

Quote:
When Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesians, he wasn't talking about just the Apostles who had power , but to all believers who have received the riches and glory of His inheritance in the saints. And what is the surpassing greatness of His power towards us who believe.


I said I'd quit, but I just can't ignore this one.

This word power is all through Ephesians chapters 1,2,3, and Paul is saying it's the same power that raised Jesus from the dead. He did not say it's only to be used to raise US from the dead.

The context of all three chapters is about the power given to those Ephesians , and any one else in Christ, IF they will receive it.

3:20 Ephesians
"Now to HIM who is able to do exceeding abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us." How plain can this be?

I won't quote all three chapters, I urge you to read it for your self.

Yes, it's resurrection power, but we don,t use it to resurrect ourselves. God uses the empowered gifts, through us, to do the work He gives us to do.And once again you either ignore or miss the point. This thread is about the miraculous gifts and you are using the word power as a catch all. The context of the word determines what it is referring to and to use it as a catch all is to misuse the Scriptures. It is called eisogesis(sp?), reading into rather than exegesis(sp?), reading out of. You are using unrelated passages to claim proof of a doctrine. And I have read Ephesians many times over and expect to continue to do so as long as God gives me the ability to understand anything.

[mlqurgw]

This argument might - and I stress "might" - hold water in regards to the gift of prophecy or prophetic utterance. But not in regards to other gifts such as healing. It doesn't make the case that ALL gifts have ceased. Especially in light of I Corinthians 12 which gives the church detailed instructions on how to practice them.

Sorry to say if the gifts were for the apostles only (the only folks who wrote/spoke from direct inspiriation the canon) - then I seriously doubt Paul would give the church at Corinth (the most jacked up early chuch of them all) detailed instructions on how to go about using them.
I see your point but I think you may have missed mine. The gifts were a sign to that generation that God was speaking by men. All those gifts were under the direct ministry of an Apostle and when the last of them died the gifts began to cease. You find very little to almost no mention of them after the first century up until about the early 1900's and the Asuza Street Revival. If the gifts were so important and so necessary to life in the church where are the Churches in Corinth and Ephesus now? Did those churches remain because they had the gifts? Far too much focus is on gifts and blessings and all sorts of things that take the focus off the real issue: Who is Christ and what did He do? God worked miracles in the Old Testament apart and through the prophets. But there came a time when those miracles and even prophecy ceased. Why? Because they had served their purpose. They returned when that One in whom, instead of by whom, God speaks. They were carried on by the Apostles as a sign that they were speaking and writing by the inspiration of God and that was their purpose. The churches who had them had them also as a sign to that generation that God has spoken. Now we no longer need those signs. We have the Word of God and the Spirit speaks by it.

[PROPHECYKID]

There is alot off confusion on this topic. No where does the bible teach that when one is baptised of the holy spirit they spake in tongues. It happened to the disciples but it happened for a reason. It was passover time and jews from all over speaking different LANGUAGES were coming around. When the disciples spake in the different tongues each man heard it in their own language.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And dwelling at Jerusalem there were Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 But this sound occurring, the multitude came together and were confounded, because they each heard them speaking in his own dialect.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not these who speak all Galileans?
Act 2:8 And how do we each hear in our own dialect in which we were born?
Why didnt Jesus speak in tongues when he was baptised with the holy ghost. He didnt need to, everyone spoke the same language. The gift of tongues is for overcoming language barriers. The only times the disciples spake in tongues were when men of a different language were present like at pentecost. There is no bible scripture that says that tongues are a special language between god and man. What it says is that when you speak in tongues around people not of that language God alone understands what you are saying, the people wouldnt and Paul stronly says that without an interpreter one should not speak in another tongue (LANGUAGE).

1Co 14:26 Then how is it, brothers? When you come together, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be for building up.
1Co 14:27 If one speaks in a language, let it be by two, or at the most three, and in succession. And let one interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there is no interpreter, let him be silent in a church; and let him speak to himself and to God.
1Co 14:19 howbeit in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

How many interpreters do we find in churches today? Everyone just speaking in tongues is not Pauls idea of edifying the church. He definitely would not do it. God is not a God of confusion but order. The gift of tongues is necessary to reach those seperated due to language barriers. Look at this text.

1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving: but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to them that believe.

So why do we need to speak in tongues among the believers and not the unbelievers? A TONGUE IS A LANGUAGE. When an African sees an Latino speaking his (the african's) native language and proclaiming Christ to him it is a sign to the African that this man is sent from God so that he could believe on Christ.
The gift of prophecy is a sign to the believers that you are in the right place.
Rev 19:10 And I fell down before his feet to worship him. And he saith unto me, See thou do it not: I am a fellow–servant with thee and with thy brethren that hold the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

I hope this helps someone. I respect all your views and i believe every view by each individual should be considered.

[Behe's Boy]

I see your point but I think you may have missed mine. The gifts were a sign to that generation that God was speaking by men. All those gifts were under the direct ministry of an Apostle and when the last of them died the gifts began to cease. You find very little to almost no mention of them after the first century up until about the early 1900's and the Asuza Street Revival.

I disagree with you here. The churches at Corinth and Ephesus were not under the direct ministry of an Apostle. They were planted by Paul - but I think its safe to say they were not under his direct ministry. How long was Paul even in Corinth? The whole point of his letters to them is because he had to give them clarification on some things because they were not under his direct ministry. He actually sends Timothy there to get things in order - Timothy was not an apostle. So this argument doesn't wash with me.

Also - there are a lot of instances of miraculous gifts in church history - they just aren't refered to as "Baptisms in the Spirit." Read Fox's Book of Martyrs for some examples. Take a look at the "great awakening" in colonial americal for others.

The Asuzu street revival is a bad example imo. And an example - quite frankly - of misuse of the gifts.



If the gifts were so important and so necessary to life in the church where are the Churches in Corinth and Ephesus now? Did those churches remain because they had the gifts? Far too much focus is on gifts and blessings and all sorts of things that take the focus off the real issue: Who is Christ and what did He do? God worked miracles in the Old Testament apart and through the prophets. But there came a time when those miracles and even prophecy ceased. Why? Because they had served their purpose. They returned when that One in whom, instead of by whom, God speaks. They were carried on by the Apostles as a sign that they were speaking and writing by the inspiration of God and that was their purpose. The churches who had them had them also as a sign to that generation that God has spoken. Now we no longer need those signs. We have the Word of God and the Spirit speaks by it.

I agree with you - and it is sad that in most churches today the gifts are misused - in my humble opinion. Still - it does not prove that the gifts have ceased - nor is it supported in scripture. And again - this may support that the gift of prophecy has ceased - but not all.

[DeaconDean]

I don't want to start a fuss, but somebody, not memtioning any names, uses Mark 16:17-18 as their basis.

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

What does the second part of that verse say?

"They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

Who is it, the "snake handlers" and "posion drinkers" of the Tennessee/West Virginia area that practice this.

What is their line of thought. Well if a person gets bit, too bad, their faith wasn't enough. If they die while drinking stricnine, oh well.

I don't need to play with snakes to know they bite. i don't need to drink poison to know it kills. To me, this is just like what Jesus said:

"It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." -Matt. 4:7 (KJV)

After a certain contextual time, ask yourselves this, did Cornelius speak in tongues? Did the Phillippian jailer?

Did the Ethopian eunuch?

Ron you know I love ya brother, but I do disagree to an extent with you.

I do believe that the only gift that has been cut off is the gift of "apostles." (1 Cor. 12:28)

I was saved in 1974, to the best of my recollection, I did not speak in "tongues."

I rededicated my life in 1998, I didn't speak in tongues then either.

Hum...I guess I just I ain't saved.

"these signs shall follow them that believe;..they shall speak with new tongues"

John Gill comments:

"they shall speak with new tongues:
or languages, not such as were new made, and had never been heard and known before; but foreign languages, such as they had never learned, or were able to speak, or understood before; and this not only did the apostles on the day of pentecost, but even common believers at other times, (Acts 2:4,6,11 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=ac+2:4,6,11)) (Acts 10:45,46 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=ac+10:45,46)) (1 Corinthians 12:10,28,30 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+12:10,28,30)) (14:13,18,26,27 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+14:13,18,26,27)) ."

http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=mr&chapter=16&verse=17

Matthew Henry says:

"3. What power they should be endowed with, for the confirmation of the doctrine they were to preach (v. 17); These signs shall follow them that believe. Not that all who believe, shall be able to produce these signs, but some, even as many as were employed in propagating the faith, and bringing others to it; for signs are intended for them that believe not; see 1 Co. 14:22. It added much to the glory and evidence of the gospel, that the preachers not only wrought miracles themselves, but conferred upon others a power to work miracles, which power followed some of them that believed, wherever they went to preach. They shall do wonders in Christ’s name, the same name into which they were baptized, in the virtue of power derived from him, and fetched in by prayer. Some particular signs are mentioned;..(2.) They shall speak with new tongues, which they had never learned, or been acquainted with; and this was both a miracle (a miracle upon the mind ), for the confirming of the truth of the gospel, and a means of spreading the gospel among those nations that had not heard it. It saved the preachers a vast labour in learning the languages; and, no doubt, they who by miracle were made masters of languages, were complete masters of them and of all their native elegancies, which were proper both to instruct and affect, which would very much recommend them and their preaching."

http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=mr&chapter=16#Mr16_17

It would seem that John Gill and Matthew Henry agree on this.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[mlqurgw]

I don't want to start a fuss, but somebody, not memtioning any names, uses Mark 16:17-18 as their basis.

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

What does the second part of that verse say?

"They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

Who is it, the "snake handlers" and "posion drinkers" of the Tennessee/West Virginia area that practice this.

What is their line of thought. Well if a person gets bit, too bad, their faith wasn't enough. If they die while drinking stricnine, oh well.

I don't need to play with snakes to know they bite. i don't need to drink poison to know it kills. To me, this is just like what Jesus said:

"It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." -Matt. 4:7 (KJV)

After a certain contextual time, ask yourselves this, did Cornelius speak in tongues? Did the Phillippian jailer?

Did the Ethopian eunuch?

Ron you know I love ya brother, but I do disagree to an extent with you.

I do believe that the only gift that has been cut off is the gift of "apostles." (1 Cor. 12:28)

I was saved in 1974, to the best of my recollection, I did not speak in "tongues."

I rededicated my life in 1998, I didn't speak in tongues then either.

Hum...I guess I just I ain't saved.

"these signs shall follow them that believe;..they shall speak with new tongues"

John Gill comments:

"they shall speak with new tongues:
or languages, not such as were new made, and had never been heard and known before; but foreign languages, such as they had never learned, or were able to speak, or understood before; and this not only did the apostles on the day of pentecost, but even common believers at other times, (Acts 2:4,6,11 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=ac+2:4,6,11)) (Acts 10:45,46 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=ac+10:45,46)) (1 Corinthians 12:10,28,30 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+12:10,28,30)) (14:13,18,26,27 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+14:13,18,26,27)) ."

http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=mr&chapter=16&verse=17

Matthew Henry says:

"3. What power they should be endowed with, for the confirmation of the doctrine they were to preach (v. 17); These signs shall follow them that believe. Not that all who believe, shall be able to produce these signs, but some, even as many as were employed in propagating the faith, and bringing others to it; for signs are intended for them that believe not; see 1 Co. 14:22. It added much to the glory and evidence of the gospel, that the preachers not only wrought miracles themselves, but conferred upon others a power to work miracles, which power followed some of them that believed, wherever they went to preach. They shall do wonders in Christ’s name, the same name into which they were baptized, in the virtue of power derived from him, and fetched in by prayer. Some particular signs are mentioned;..(2.) They shall speak with new tongues, which they had never learned, or been acquainted with; and this was both a miracle (a miracle upon the mind ), for the confirming of the truth of the gospel, and a means of spreading the gospel among those nations that had not heard it. It saved the preachers a vast labour in learning the languages; and, no doubt, they who by miracle were made masters of languages, were complete masters of them and of all their native elegancies, which were proper both to instruct and affect, which would very much recommend them and their preaching."

http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=mr&chapter=16#Mr16_17

It would seem that John Gill and Matthew Henry agree on this.

God Bless

Till all are one. Brother, I knew my position wouldn't be the popular one. I recognize that my argument will not satisfy many. That is why I stated it as why I am a cessationist. I believe it to be Biblical and sound but don't expect others to. I offered it in order that some may at least have some idea of a Biblical reason for cessation. I do not at all think it irrefutable. I honestly don't consider the matter all that important except when those who teach that folks must have these gifts to be saved. I view it as I do prophecy, as a thing the enemy uses to take the focus off of Christ. People want to debate and discuss everything imaginable in order to not have to deal with Christ. He is the only subject I think important. Far too many have a religion and that religion involves so many things. Religion is always about things. It concentrates on outward signs and acts but truth is always wrapped up in the person and work of Christ. Religion talks a lot about sin, whether this thing is sin or that thing is sin. It talks a lot about love, how we ought to love and who we ought to love. Religion talks a lot about life, how we ought to live and give and act. Not that all those things are unimportant but they are not the truth. All the things fall into place in their proper order when they are looked at in the light of Christ. If you want to know about sin go to the Cross. There you see what sin is and how God deals with it. If you want to know about love go to the Cross. Love is on display there as has never been seen before or since. If you want to know how we ought to live go to Christ and His Cross. There we see that He loved us and gave Himself for us and it is enough to inspire us to love Him and give ourselves for Him. Let those who want focus on things. I wish only to learn of Him and rest in Him. I desire only to point others to Him. I do get caught up in things also and when I do I speak or post in threads such as this. If any want to discuss tongues and gifts them do so in the context of how those things relate and help us see Christ and serve Him and His. Otherwise they are just things.
I will now slither down from my soapbox.
I love you and Behe's Boy. Ron.

[DeaconDean]

Brother, I knew my position wouldn't be the popular one. I recognize that my argument will not satisfy many. That is why I stated it as why I am a cessationist. I believe it to be Biblical and sound but don't expect others to. I offered it in order that some may at least have some idea of a Biblical reason for cessation. I do not at all think it irrefutable. I honestly don't consider the matter all that important except when those who teach that folks must have these gifts to be saved. I view it as I do prophecy, as a thing the enemy uses to take the focus off of Christ. People want to debate and discuss everything imaginable in order to not have to deal with Christ. He is the only subject I think important. Far too many have a religion and that religion involves so many things. Religion is always about things. It concentrates on outward signs and acts but truth is always wrapped up in the person and work of Christ. Religion talks a lot about sin, whether this thing is sin or that thing is sin. It talks a lot about love, how we ought to love and who we ought to love. Religion talks a lot about life, how we ought to live and give and act. Not that all those things are unimportant but they are not the truth. All the things fall into place in their proper order when they are looked at in the light of Christ. If you want to know about sin go to the Cross. There you see what sin is and how God deals with it. If you want to know about love go to the Cross. Love is on display there as has never been seen before or since. If you want to know how we ought to live go to Christ and His Cross. There we see that He loved us and gave Himself for us and it is enough to inspire us to love Him and give ourselves for Him. Let those who want focus on things. I wish only to learn of Him and rest in Him. I desire only to point others to Him. I do get caught up in things also and when I do I speak or post in threads such as this. If any want to discuss tongues and gifts them do so in the context of how those things relate and help us see Christ and serve Him and His.

Brother, you know I love you and deeply respect your opinions. So I wouldn't necessarilly disagree openly with you. However, there is some confusion here. I was not addressing you per se, but a certain Word of Faith believer here.

But if I may, why would the apostle tell the believers in Corinth to look for gifts that had been cut off?

Seriously, I'm not looking to debate, just looking for your line of thought on this.

God Bless

Till all are one.

P.S. I hope you and your family are blessed and how did that thing go in Texas for you?

[mlqurgw]

Brother, you know I love you and deeply respect your opinions. So I wouldn't necessarilly disagree openly with you. However, there is some confusion here. I was not addressing you per se, but a certain Word of Faith believer here. I am sorry. The confusion is my fault. My tirade wasn't in response to you specifically but to all. I used your post to jump onto a soapbox. You are certainly free to disagree with me whenever you think I am wrong on any subject. It has no effect on our being united in love to Christ and each other in Him. I am never offended by you nor can I ever be.

But if I may, why would the apostle tell the believers in Corinth to look for gifts that had been cut off? Because they hadn't been at that time. They were still serving as a sign to unbelievers. The New Testament hadn't been written yet. I believe the last sign given is the complete Scriptures. Christ spoke about those who seek a sign and called them evil and adultrous in Matt. 12 :39. Paul was telling the Corinthian believers to expect the signs because they would be given but in no way does he imply that they would continue as signs. Christ makes it clear that looking for a sign is evil. Paul and Christ aren't contradicting each other they are complimenting each other. Paul recognized that the signs were being given and served a purpose at that time and Christ simply points out that those who must have a sign are evil.

Seriously, I'm not looking to debate, just looking for your line of thought on this.

God Bless

Till all are one. I know. You can freely disagree with me whenever you believe I am wrong and it will not affect our being united in love for Christ and each other at all. You can not offend me.

P.S. I hope you and your family are blessed and how did that thing go in Texas for you?We are well. I am almost recoverd from the broken back I got at work. It wasn't a serious break but a painful one. It hardly hurts now. as far as Texas goes, it hasn't. I was at one time convinced that I was God's man for them but have since been unconvinced. I don't expect to hear from them anytime soon. I am grateful to God that I didn't run without being sent.

[DeaconDean]

I understand your position better, I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

As I see it, the Holy Spirit is still giving these gifts even today. Perhaps not the gift of Apostles, but still, giving the gift of evangelism, teaching, etc.

With so many like Benny Hinn, I do believe that so many have abused this gift or even thought they had it to the point of padding their pockets, that this gift may rarely be given any more.

But just because we disagree every now and again does not mean I value your opinions brother. And I'll try to respect them.

Sorry to hear you broke your back. I did not know that. I wish i did, for I would have said an extra prayer for you. But I'm so glad God took care of you. As he Promised He would.

Sorry to hear about the Texas job. I'm still waiting on mine too. Perhaps its for the best. The move would have been hard on your family anyway. Well you know how God works, close one door, open another.

I'll be keeping you in my prayers Brother.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[Vambram]

After reading through this thread, and the attempts by AoG'ers, pentecostals, and others to explain the gift of tongues, as well as seeing on the first page their belief that one is not saved and born-again unless one speaks in tongues; I had to think about this, and wonder to myself as to whether or not to join in on this discussion. However, I am aware that most AoG Christians, and that most Pentecostal Christians may not necessarily believe that a believer must speak in tongues in order to completely demonstrate that the believer is saved and baptized by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, after reading excellent and effective refutations of that belief by others in this thread, I decided what other contributions might I be able to make in the discussion.
On an earlier page, someone brought in 1 Corinthians 14 along with some good, but brief, input there. So, if there are any AoG's, or pentecostals, or anyone else whom desires to keep this topic and thread moving along, I am going to post my beliefs about 1 Corinthians 14, and wait hopefully for responses afterwards. :cool:


1 Corinthians 14:1-5

Prophesying, that is, explaining Scripture, is compared with speaking with tongues. This drew attention, more than the plain interpretation of Scripture; it gratified pride more, but promoted the purposes of Christian charity less; it would not equally do good to the souls of men. What cannot be understood, never can edify. No advantage can be reaped from the most excellent discourses, if delivered in language such as the hearers cannot speak or understand. Every ability or possession is valuable in proportion to its usefulness. Even fervent, spiritual affection must be governed by the exercise of the understanding, else men will disgrace the truths they profess to promote.

1 Corinthians 14:6-14
I believe that even an apostle could not edify others whom were hearing his words, unless he spoke so as to be understood by his hearers. The Greek word for “edify” is oikodomeo According to Strong’s Dictionary in his concordance, oikodomeo means: to construct or (figuratively) to confirm.. to build up, or embolden. Please keep that definition in mind for oikodomeo (edify) as you consider this chapter of Scripture while thinking about the words of this Bible study.
I believe that to speak words that have no meaning to those who hear them, is but speaking into the air. If only God can understand what is being said with a use of the gift of tongues, then how is the congregation of listeners in the assembly edified? I believe that cannot answer the end of speaking, which has no meaning; in this case, speaker and hearers are barbarians to each other because they would not understand each other. I believe that all religious services should be so performed in Christian assemblies, that all may join in, and profit by them. Language plain and easy to be understood, is the most proper for public worship, and other religious exercises. Every true follower of Christ will rather desire to do good to others, than to get a name for learning or fine speaking.

1 Corinthians 14:15-25

I believe that there can be no assent to prayers that are not understood. I believe that a truly Christian minister will seek much more to do spiritual good to men's souls, than to get the greatest applause to himself. This is proving himself the servant of Christ. Children are apt to be struck with novelty; but do not act like them. I believe that Christians should be like children, void of guile and malice; yet they should not be unskillful as to the word of righteousness, but only as to the arts of mischief. It is a proof that a people are forsaken of God, when he gives them up to the rule of those who teach them to worship in another language. They can never be benefited by such teaching. Yet thus the preachers did who delivered their instructions in an unknown tongue.
Would it not make Christianity ridiculous to a heathen, to hear the ministers pray or preach in a language which neither he nor the assembly understood? However, IF those who minister, plainly interpret Scripture, or preach the great truths and rules of the gospel, a heathen or unlearned person might become a convert to Christianity. His conscience might be touched, the secrets of his heart might be revealed to him, and so he might be brought to confess his guilt, and to own that God was present in the assembly. Scripture truth, plainly and duly taught, has a wonderful power to awaken the conscience and touch the heart.

1 Corinthians 14:26-33

I believe that religious exercises in public assemblies should have this view; Let all be done to edifying. As to the speaking in an unknown tongue, if another were present who could interpret, two miraculous gifts might be exercised at once, and thereby the church be edified, and the faith of the hearers confirmed at the same time. As to prophesying, two or three only should speak at one meeting, and this one after the other, not all at once. The man who is inspired by the Spirit of God will observe order and decency in delivering his revelations. God never teaches men to neglect their duties, or to act in any way unbecoming their age or station.

1 Corinthians 14:36-40

The Spirit of Christ can never contradict itself; and if their revelations, i.e. those whom speak with a gift of prophecy, are against those of the apostle, they do not come from the same Spirit. The way to keep peace, truth, and order in the church, is to seek that which is good for it, to bear with that which is not hurtful to its welfare, and to keep up good behavior, order, and decency.

:groupray:

[cmefly]

I am a Baptist, and although I have been saved for a more years than I've been a Baptist, I haven't heard our pastor tell us or imply that speaking in tongues is not a gift these days.
I haven't heard him speak about it but not against it either.
I wanted to add that most people I have talked to about the gift of tongues have implied they are skeptical about how many people seem to be gifted in that area. I also am skeptical. I have never prayed or asked for that gift either.

[DeaconDean]

I am a Baptist, and although I have been saved for a more years than I've been a Baptist, I haven't heard our pastor tell us or imply that speaking in tongues is not a gift these days.
I haven't heard him speak about it but not against it either.
I wanted to add that most people I have talked to about the gift of tongues have implied they are skeptical about how many people seem to be gifted in that area. I also am skeptical. I have never prayed or asked for that gift either.

The problem over the last 20-30 years has been the open display of this gift in public prayers, i.e., saying grace over dinner, after somebody broke the bread of life, etc. I used to visit a "Christian" Coffee place, not much, just a place to sit around, talk, drink coffee, once a week they'd bring in a person to discuss or preach and I used to carry a Charasmatic/Pentecostal brother with me to this coffee shoppe. Usually, after some discussion, or after the preaching, this young brother would pray, not that there is anything wrong with that, but praying in "tongues" in public is forbidden by scriptures.

"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." -1 Cor. 14:28 (KJV)

Now I know what your gonna say, that wasn't a church. But I beg your pardon. Jesus said that the simplest form of a church was:

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." -Mt. 18:20 (KJV)

Where two or three are gather together in my name, that is the simplest form of a church.

And although I do not doubt this young man had the gift, it was a misunderstanding of how to use this gift that he did not understand. You see, praying in tongues is fine, but not in public, and most especially not if there isn't an interpreter nearby. Praying in tongues is:

"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...He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself;" -1 Cor. 14:2,4 (KJV)

I do think most of the problems associated with the gift of tongues has been the "exclusive" use and subsequent mis-use by Charasmatics/Pentecostals.

Just read and apply scriptures. Its just that simple.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[HappyChicken]

I have been a member of so many denominations I get confused on this subject. When I went to one particular church, they told me I had to speak in tongues to show proof I had the Holy Ghost. They would not allow me to participate on the stage (play piano) unless I did so. I prayed and prayed for the gift, never recieved it. Later on, I attended another church. The pastor there told me that if anyone spoke in tongues that there had better be an interpreter, quickly. I now attend a Baptist Church and the topic has not come up yet since I started going there.

[Behe's Boy]

However, I am aware that most AoG Christians, and that most Pentecostal Christians may not necessarily believe that a believer must speak in tongues in order to completely demonstrate that the believer is saved and baptized by the Holy Spirit.

Nice post overall bro - but just to clarify for you - the AOG church has it in their statement of faith that the Baptism of the Holy Spirity is evidenced by speaking in tongues. It ain't right - but it is what they hold to.

[DeaconDean]

I have been a member of so many denominations I get confused on this subject. When I went to one particular church, they told me I had to speak in tongues to show proof I had the Holy Ghost. They would not allow me to participate on the stage (play piano) unless I did so. I prayed and prayed for the gift, never recieved it. Later on, I attended another church. The pastor there told me that if anyone spoke in tongues that there had better be an interpreter, quickly. I now attend a Baptist Church and the topic has not come up yet since I started going there.

Now see here, this is the sort of thing that could hinder a Christians walk.

If you take that churches dogma/doctrines literally, then, your not saved. You don't have the Holy Spirit residing in you.

Scriptures are clear, not everybody is given this gift. Period. And to use it as a "blanket" rule is wrong.

If this is the rule, then billions and billions of Catholics, Orthodox, Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., are not saved. I didn't speak in tongues when I was baptized, does that mean the Holy Spirit is not in me?

"I trow not." -Luke 17:9 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

[TexasSky]

As a Baptist, I am rather surprised, that I haven't seen (though I haven't read all of the posts) the mention that many Baptists do not think the gift of tongues ended.

HOWEVER, we do think that the gift of tongues is speaking a language that someone else understands.
When it happened in Acts, it was not a "heavenly language that no one understood." Rather, "Each one heard it in their own language." It would be like someone who never heard Spanish, suddenly speaking Spanish.

[Holyroller125]

There is alot off confusion on this topic. No where does the bible teach that when one is baptised of the holy spirit they spake in tongues. It happened to the disciples but it happened for a reason. It was passover time and jews from all over speaking different LANGUAGES were coming around. When the disciples spake in the different tongues each man heard it in their own language.

Act 2:3 And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed; and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And dwelling at Jerusalem there were Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 But this sound occurring, the multitude came together and were confounded, because they each heard them speaking in his own dialect.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not these who speak all Galileans?
Act 2:8 And how do we each hear in our own dialect in which we were born?
Why didnt Jesus speak in tongues when he was baptised with the holy ghost. He didnt need to, everyone spoke the same language. The gift of tongues is for overcoming language barriers. The only times the disciples spake in tongues were when men of a different language were present like at pentecost. There is no bible scripture that says that tongues are a special language between god and man. What it says is that when you speak in tongues around people not of that language God alone understands what you are saying, the people wouldnt and Paul stronly says that without an interpreter one should not speak in another tongue (LANGUAGE).

1Co 14:26 Then how is it, brothers? When you come together, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be for building up.
1Co 14:27 If one speaks in a language, let it be by two, or at the most three, and in succession. And let one interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there is no interpreter, let him be silent in a church; and let him speak to himself and to God.
1Co 14:19 howbeit in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

How many interpreters do we find in churches today? Everyone just speaking in tongues is not Pauls idea of edifying the church. He definitely would not do it. God is not a God of confusion but order. The gift of tongues is necessary to reach those seperated due to language barriers. Look at this text.

1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving: but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to them that believe.

So why do we need to speak in tongues among the believers and not the unbelievers? A TONGUE IS A LANGUAGE. When an African sees an Latino speaking his (the african's) native language and proclaiming Christ to him it is a sign to the African that this man is sent from God so that he could believe on Christ.
The gift of prophecy is a sign to the believers that you are in the right place.
Rev 19:10 And I fell down before his feet to worship him. And he saith unto me, See thou do it not: I am a fellow–servant with thee and with thy brethren that hold the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

I hope this helps someone. I respect all your views and i believe every view by each individual should be considered.
If it is only for Jews on passover, how do you do business with Acts 10:42-48?

Greg

[onelamb]

Nice post overall bro - but just to clarify for you - the AOG church has it in their statement of faith that the Baptism of the Holy Spirity is evidenced by speaking in tongues. It ain't right - but it is what they hold to.

I believe it is right-in the Bible-each and every time we are given evidence of the Baptism in the Spirit-tongues are there. Who are we to decide to change it. If it was good enough for the disciples-it's good enough for us.

[Angel4Truth]

Can you show me the phrase "evidence" of salvation through speaking in tongues in scripture please?

[onelamb]

I never said "evidence of salvation" angel4truth. I said, "baptism in the Holy Spirit"-and yes, when we are given evidence of ones baptism in the Spirit tongues are there.

[Angel4Truth]

when we are given evidence of ones baptism in the Spirit tongues are there again can you show me where the bible says we will have evidence of salvation by speaking in tongues and do you believe everyone who does not speak in tongues is not saved?

[Behe's Boy]

I believe it is right-in the Bible-each and every time we are given evidence of the Baptism in the Spirit-tongues are there. Who are we to decide to change it. If it was good enough for the disciples-it's good enough for us.

You're wrong on this. Check out Acts 8:14-17. There you have an instance of the Baptism of the HS yet tongues not accompanying.

[DeaconDean]

I believe it is right-in the Bible-each and every time we are given evidence of the Baptism in the Spirit-tongues are there. Who are we to decide to change it. If it was good enough for the disciples-it's good enough for us.

Ok, show me in the Bible where those who were saved by the preaching and teaching of Jesus Christ, had:


evidence of the Baptism in the Spirit-tongues

Strange, I don't recall Cornelius and his household speaking in tongues. (Acts 10)

Strange, I don't recall reading about the Ethiopian eunuch speaking in tongues. (Acts 8)

Strange, I don't recall reading about Paul speaking in tongues at his conversion. (Acts 9)

Stupid me.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[ImmersionX]

My only experience with this is that I witnessed a person "speaking in tongues", yet there was no interpreter present and said person claims to have a "blackout" type moment, and remembered nothing of the event. Now I know that's against the scripture's word regarding this subject.

1 Corinthians 14:28

According to the bible, the speaking in tongues was for the benefit of the unbeliever, thus they could understand what was being taught by the Apostles/disciples, via real language.

1 Cor. 14: 19-25


I also know that the gift was for the Apostles and some disciples only and that during Acts, gifts of the Holy Spirit being reported by the author diminished rapidly in the texts.

I therefore have come to the conclusion(not just now, but long ago) that modernday "speaking in tongues", unless you are speaking the gospel in another real language to someone for reasons of interpretation and understanding, can be chalked up to people being caught up in a moment during services or a revival, or any other place where belief in god is shown in a very exhuberant fasion.

peace.

[Levahddi]

:doh: :doh: :doh:

[Levahddi]

The gifts of the church/believer are wonderful gifts, but when these gifts become a qualification as to wether or not you are a true Christian/saved it becomes very scarry to me. :scratch:
</IMG>

[HappyChicken]

First, the difference is the gift of the Holy Ghost w/evidencal tongues and the gift of tongues which is a corporate ministry. The Baptism of the Holy Ghost itiniates one into covenant, and the gift of tongues is for a corporate meeting.

I concur that the "gift of tongues" is not for everybody. On the other hand, every Christian should want to be spirit-filled according to Acts 2. Again, how can one say "I accept Jesus, and yet, willingly reject the baptism of the Holy Ghost?

Greg Norton

When I left the LDS church, I was baptized in a Oneness Apostolic church. They told me that the gift of Tongues was evident of the Holy Ghost, and if I did not speak in tongues, then I did not have the Holy Ghost. I was not allowed to participate in leading the worship service on the piano or anything....until I recieved the Holy Spirit...and showed it by speaking in tongues. It was kind of unsettling to me because I prayed and prayed for it. They kept telling me that there was something I was not giving up. I was willing to give up anything...but they claimed I must not have been honest with myself or something. I got so discouraged over it, I left that church. I know I have the Holy Spirit in me. I don't have to prove it to other people either. If God chooses for me to either pray in tongues or whatever then that would be awesome and I would welcome it. I seen alot in that little church. They wanted to point out things things that I possibly was not willing to give up....but then there was all kinds of adultry and everything going on by these people who claimed they had the Holy Spirit...and by people who led the worship service....yet, they still spoke in tongues...would that be of God??

[HappyChicken]

oops i forgot I had already pretty much posted here about my experiences...... sorry for the repeat lol

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Hi everyone. How can Baptists deny that speaking in tongues is for today when the Bible clearly says that it will exist until that which is perfect (Jesus) is come? :confused:

.....
...
with tongues, without tongues;
believe in tongues , don't believe in tongues;
I can't understand why someone would ask about this
when the group they're in kicks anyone out who love the Truth.
For examples email me - they're not allowed to be posted.

[AnyaMa]

I think speaking in tounges is a beautiful gift from God. While it is the least of the gifts, it is a gift nonetheless and can be used to glorify God. What could be wrong with that? :)

[ImmersionX]

I think speaking in tounges is a beautiful gift from God. While it is the least of the gifts, it is a gift nonetheless and can be used to glorify God. What could be wrong with that? :)
EVERYTHING is wrong with it....because it's not for today. Reread earlier pages in this thread if you want biblical proof of that.(also the claim of Private Prayer Language is bogus as well.)

[Angel4Truth]

I think speaking in tounges is a beautiful gift from God. While it is the least of the gifts, it is a gift nonetheless and can be used to glorify God. What could be wrong with that? :)
I have a question - how do you know its glorifying God when you dont know what you are saying?

[ImmersionX]

I don't want to sound like a doomsayer, but laying on of hands, then subsequent speaking in tongues...how can I put this...it's not from God(anymore). It's sociopsychological manipulation by the leader of the environment you were in at the time. Peer pressure, subtle hypnosis, and God forbid(and I am serious when I state this...!) demonic spirit manifestations are very real explainations for what people experience today. I don't buy that Pentecostalism is a valid faith, nor the Charasmatic movement, nor anyone claiming to be able to control the "power of the Spirit", nor any other false prophets or heretic that manipulates as a means to an end. That's my story and I'm stickin to it. I realize that I just invalidated it seems a major chunk of the body of Christ...well, in my opinion, I did not, due to the simple fact that those that I mentioned were never a valid part of the Body of Christ to begin with. Paul warns WAY TOO MANY TIMES concerning false prophets in the Church...well the entire thing all started back at Azusa, and continues to this day with Slaying in the Spirit, healings, Word of Faith, all preachers on TBN, Benny Hinn be the Master of Lies and Heresy, and more modern movements such as the Vineyard churches, John Wimber, Arnott, you get my point. The false prophets are abound in todays church...and seems people all over the world are falling victim and never truely knowing what salvation the bible is truely speaking of. This is serious business, it pains me to bear witness to it, I pray for the Church everyday....I will not be persuaded...nor will I hold back and be politcally correct about anything regarding these issues. I won't be persuaded, say what you will. If you don't get what Im saying here, do research, stop living in an experience based faith....!!!! and wise up...cause your salvation is at stake. People that find themselves in a church that was founded, by one man, or based on 2-3 partial verses of scripture I pray for everyday, due to the simple fact that if they don't wise up, use one of the TRUE gifts of the Spirit(for today), called Wisdom....they will continue to be on a very bad road indeed.

I know the OP is speaking about speaking in tongues...but that's just step one to greater heresy. So, in other words I deny that speaking in tongues is a gift for today.