Are tongues a sign of the Holy Spirit?

[sheep wrecked]

(02-04-2009 12:43 AM)strefanash Wrote:  But ST Paul said regarding order in church let a person give a tongue one or at the most two or three at a time, and then the interpretation, one at a time I Cor 14:37.

So clearly if an interpretation is to be given the tongue is of an angelic kind, for a foreign language would not need one.

Hence tongues of angels.

The problem is that no where in the NT does it say that tongues is an angelic language. The Greek clearly shows that it is a known language on this planet. The disciples did not speak angelic tongues - they spoke the native language of those who came to Jerusalem on Pentecost.

In 1 Cor 13 - Paul is simply using an allegory IF I spoke in the tongues of angels. The language that the angels spoke were understood by the hearer, so if there is an "angelic language" we do not have it, don't need it, and would be unable to speak it. We are in corruptable bodies, not heavenly ones

Quote:Now there has been much nonsense in the pentecostal movement over this one. But I am not about to reject tongue speaking in principle just because of abuse by these people. (my church was pentecostal baptist, that miugh tsound strange but this is New Zeael;and in the 80's. American eccelesiological definitions simply do not apply here

Also. having something of an ability for languages ands a musicians ear, I think i can guess by the syntax and sound made that it is a language and not just carnal jibberish.

shamala shamala babababa shamala bababa, ive heard this one time and time again. pure jibberish by someone making up something at a subconscious level.

I have done a lot of reading on this topic for the last few years. Having been a former tongue talker, it was vital for me to discover the truth. My conclusion after going through mounds of studies, the tongues of today is not Biblical.

1) True tongues ceased around the first century. There is no evidence of them until around 1800. The tongues that are mentioned from the first century until then, historically, are connected with heretical movements - the base of which is another Gospel. The tongues that appeared in the 1800s were manifested through another false system - again, based in another gospel. It is through that system that tongues today come from. It was passed from generation from generation by the laying on of hands and through spiritual connection with seducing spirits.

2) The purpose of tongues in the NT was a sign to unbelievers to confirm the Gospel. The NT being completed is now the authority for confirmation of the Gospel, not tongues. They are no longer needed.

3) Tongues was under the authority of the Apostles, as were the other gifts. As there are no longer the Apostles of Christ, there is no one to judge the spirit that the gifts and tongues are done under. Without that judgment, one plays russian roulette with what is of the Holy Spirit and what is demonic. God is not the author of confusion - He is not going to send tongues to his body when they are infused with the tongues of demons.

4) The tongues of today are jibberish. They have been recorded and tested. Interestingly, the jibberish cannot be found to be a known language, and language specialists have proven the jibbish does not have the patterns needed to be a "real" language. Also, what has been discovered is that the tongues of today are the exact same jibberish that is spoken in satanic cults and other religions. Some of the jibberish is actually the names of demonic gods.

5) God does not play favoritism. So far, the only ones speaking in tongues are under the umbrella of charismata/pentecostal and not under other denominations - other than those who promote or implement this type of spirituality.

Quote:the purpose of a heavenly language? St Paul said when he prayed in tongues he edified himself (I Cor 14:4), and that when one prophecied one edified the church.

self edification is recommended here, and clearly he was not praying alone in known human languages that he did not speak.

He also thanked God that he prayed in tongues more than they did. So the cessationist doctrine is not applicable here

Paul did not speak in a heavenly language. Every time tongues is used in the NT it refers to a known "earthly" language. I believe that charis teaches these absurd doctrines - like Paul prayed in tongues. The text does not say that. No where in the NT is anyone instructed to pray in tongues. The three times that tongues are given, it was in praise and worship and the hearers understood perfectly what was being said.

Paul spoke at least 7 languages and probably more, he was simply stating that he would not pray in a language that was unknown to the listeners because they would not know what he was praying.

Praying in the Spirit does not mean in tongues. That is a charis twist on the text.

The edifying of oneself is a bit humorous - Paul is correcting and admonishing in 1 Cor 14, it's not good news for the Corinthians. The self-edification is a critical statement, not plumping up egos. We do not edify ourselves. God lifts us up. How can tongues edify oneself? Only if one is reveling in their own perceived favored position of speaking in tongues. Paul was speaking against that. He clearly stated that speaking in tongues when no one could understand was inexcusable. Somehow, charis has missed that little detail