Talking in Tongues.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-10-2011, 11:50 AM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
(29-09-2011 11:39 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(28-09-2011 05:42 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  (3) Do you see all this writhing about, ranting and shrieking as an important part of what you deem as the essential Christian message.

No. I see it as something that is not sound doctrine which gives some the excuse to blaspheme God.

Let me be up front about something before responding... tl;dr. It's nice to give a *complete* answer, but the average American attention span has been measured around 20 minutes, and this point-by-point rebuttal style is difficult to wade through... I can't even invest the 20 minutes when trying to make sense of it.

You know the bible commands people to speak in tongues during church services, right? Whatever your personal opinion may be on it, it doesn't seem to align with the bible's respect for it (with the natural exception for women).

The scientific view is that this practice is nonsense. There has never been a case of speaking in "nonsense" tongues that can be translated by two different people to mean even remotely the same thing. So if interpretation is found to be impossible, then that would lead one to think that speaking in tongues is just a part of the bible to be dismissed as superstitious myth.

However, one could define speaking as tongues in the sense used in Acts, rather than its current use (I know, the article is too long - just skip to "conclusion"). However, for a spiritual gift that is supposed to be given out on a somewhat regular basis, I had a very hard time coming up with a single known instance through internet searches. I would conclude, from the lack of evidence, that this doesn't happen either.

So, trying to defend the practice of speaking in tongues isn't reasonable. And that's why it doesn't surprise me that you wrote it off nearly as easily and we do.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Starcrash's post
01-10-2011, 02:43 PM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2011, 08:26 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2011 08:34 PM by Mr Woof.)
RE: Talking in Tongues.
Hello S.T.
Still having comptuer troubles so have had to utilize new post mechanism; I will have to keep it brief.

I note that you place my wording (theist friends) in quotation marks .
Im have Christiann, Theosophist, Buddhist, atheist etc friends and was not having a go at you.


Re main topic speaking in tongues
While you are critical of these people I would like to know ,in a short answer, how you can genuinely determine that your specific church has the correct interpretation of all of scripture including the O.T.

regret minor spelling errors------must dash Smile

More below -----that ghost again v
v
v









\


(2) Re demons

I take it that you think that imp type creatures with horns and spitting flames exist.
Given that mankind, in accordance with Christian teaching, is saved from their chosen sin and saved through the blood--------why are your suernatural devils neccessary. Surely such ideas are relics of the past and denigrate anything which may be good within the Gospels.


(3) Is not Christianity about faith more that "certainty". Jesus was critical of the Pharrisees who poured over doctrine but lacked spiritualiy, was he not?
I think it was the theologian Paul Tillich who state ----"In seeking to become Gods we may become less than men".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2011, 10:38 PM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Hello S.T.
Still having comptuer troubles so have had to utilize new post mechanism; I will have to keep it brief.

That is actually a good thing, it is late, and I am getting a little tired, so, the short response is a welcome sight at this point.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  I note that you place my wording (theist friends) in quotation marks .
Im have Christiann, Theosophist, Buddhist, atheist etc friends and was not having a go at you.

That is good to know. You will tell me, of course, when you are "having a go at me, right?" lol


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Re main topic speaking in tongues
While you are critical of these people

Hold on, Mr. Woof. If I have come across as being critical of these people, I apologize: it is their doctrine that I am critical of. As I said Ihave had, and still have, Pentecostal and Charismatic friends that I love dearly. Their feelings are just as important to me as are yours. That might not mean much to you, but it does to me. This is one of the things that I battle with at times in my walk with the Lord, not just sounding as though I have love for others, but actually having love for others, and I can assure you...I am my own worst critic.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  I would like to know ,in a short answer, how you can genuinely determine that your specific church has the correct interpretation of all of scripture including the O.T.

When did I say my Church has the correct interpretation? As a matter of fact, I attend a fellowship precisely because I feel they are as close to sound doctrine as one might hope to find in a collection of believers, where the chances that even 15% percent could actually tell you the doctrinal beliefs held by the leadership are slim.

But I have not once advocated a denomination or particular teachers. I believe I have made it clear I view myself as a layman, not a biblical scholar. I believe I have admitted that I am not "the one with all the answers," He is currently in Heaven as we speak, and I am but ambassador, if you will.

As to why I can feel that I myself can give an answer to much that is said to represent Christianity in the world today, is by reason of use. I spend more time in God's word than many do, I have pursued the truth as diligently as I possibly can (well, okay, there is room for improvement there too...lol), and I have in my heart a desire to speak to people about their beliefs, whether it be Christian, theosophist, buddhist, you name it. I love to talk to people about their beliefs.

And at this time, I am particularly interested in the basis of belief for the atheist. I expect it to be diverse, but so far, I have talked to only one that I would say has a genuine reason for their atheism, a reason that I can understand and have sympathy for.

As for the hatred I have seen, and the mocking of both God and those who believe in Him, I have yet to speak to one person that can justify their behavior. That is not to say there are not those here who have shown grace, even if it has been in the form of longsuffering...lol.

(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  regret minor spelling errors------must dash Smile

(psst! I also use "the computers messing up thing" to account for my spelling...just kidding)

(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  More below -----that ghost again v
v
v

Well, I may have been wrong...it may be possessed! (just kidding...again)

To tell you the truth, I might think it a blessing if my computer blew up.

(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  (2) Re demons

I take it that you think that imp type creatures with horns and spitting flames exist.

What gives you that idea? Certainly nothing I have said. As a matter of fact, in case you would like to know what I imagine demons to look like, I will tell you: they will be well dressed, speak easy to hear and digest words, will never say anything that might offend, and will convince you, because they mixed just enough truth in with their poison to make it plausible, of just about anything your heart desires. After all, men have a habit of seeking out and finding that which conforms to their own beliefs, right? Would you disagree with that? I fyou believed in UFOs, chances are you are going to fellowship with those who are likeminded.

I do remember a man that told me that he saw about a three foot demon which was in appearance just as you describe. This was actually while he was going through detox and delirium tremens to boot.

But demons, why would they want to scare those they seek to convince?

If you believe that Lucifer of scripture is in fact Satan, he is said to have been beautiful, mighty, not the caricature man has made of him in recent times. It is said, "Once you laugh at something, you will not in truth ever take it seriously again." I believe that is true. A person can look at the red, horned, tailed caricature of a creature that is said in scripture to be very powerful, cunning, and devious, and know, "This is not real."


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Given that mankind, in accordance with Christian teaching, is saved from their chosen sin

Where does this come from? Chosen sin? In scripture, there are two things to be concerned about: SIN, which refers to the nature man is born with, and sins, which are the acts of transgression that a man commits due to his SIN.

It is SIN which we are saved from, and to be precise, it is the penalty of sin that we are saved from. Not because we deserve it, nor because we have become righteous enough to avoid it, but, because Christ took that penalty, which is death...upon Himself.

More on that in the next quote:


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  and saved through the blood--------

Understand that the bible uses euphemisms quite often. Among these "the blood," as well as "body," are euphemistic for the death of Christ.

So you see, it is not that it was the liquid that coursed from His veins that is significant, but that He died in my place for my SIN. Scripture teaches that He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. Because He was not worthy of death, yet died in the place of sinful man, that sacrifice was accepted as payment for those who would, in faith, place their trust in His death.

Simple as that.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  why are your suernatural devils neccessary.

It is not a matter of them being "necessary." It just is what it is. Their existence has little to do with Christian faith, other than their doctrine plied by false teachers when they creep into the Church. It is a sad fact, but not all that call themselves Christians truly are.

You can get a glimpse of demon doctrine at work, just watch the televangelists that ply their doctrine for filthy lucre. Even the natural man can see that they are frauds, though at the same time, many see them and think this is the Church.

Which is why I take issue with doctrine that I feel is in error. But lest you think me bigheaded, know that I myself have doctrine that some would disagree with. But that is okay, we can take it to the basis of belief, and see what scripture has to say about it. And if we take from the text what is there, rather than put into the text what is not, chanvces are, both sides may actually come to an agreement (and this is between those debating doctrine, I do not mean to imply that I think anyone here will be willing to "take it the word").

One last note: I do not believe that the born again child of God has much to fear from demons. As one that believes that the New Covenant carries with it the promise of the indwelling of God, and that I believe that demons, for the most part, shy away from the Spirit of God.

While I do believe that I have been given the gift of discernment, and have at times sensed the presence of demons (and this hass only been on a very few occasions), for the most part, demons avoid true believers, and I have never had to contend with them.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Surely such ideas are relics of the past

Actually, no. Belief in demons goes back, to be sure, but that demons were a fable or myth is a foolish belief. And, as a matter of fact, demonology has actually made a comeback, and is a fascination for both believers and unbelievers alike.

One of the teachers I do endorse as sound gives testimony of an experience with a demon possessed woman who, in a guttural unnatural voice, immediately said upon his entrance into the room, "No, not him, no, not him, get him out!"

His first reaction was, "Hey, I'm not wanted here, fine by me!" But he stayed, and dealt with the demon, and said the woman was possessed of extroaordinary strength, and he left there with his shins literally bleeding.

Now, if this were probably anyone else, I may doubt the story, but I believe the story to be true, and not elaborated upon.

(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  and denigrate anything which may be good within the Gospels.

Have you read the gospels? Are you aware of the demon possession that is recounted in them? As well as in Acts?

How does a belief in a scriptural teaching...denigrate that "which may be good in the gospels?"

(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  (3) Is not Christianity about faith more that "certainty".

Depends on the context. If the context deals with doctrine, we are to contend for the once delivered faith.

If the context deals with certain conditions we are under, then we might look at faith as it is understood by the natural mind. But understand, faith is not just a "Gee I sure hope I am right" kind of mentality, faith is the driving force behind our actions, words, and deeds.

Look at Hebrews Eleven: by faith they did this or that. If it were not a matter of certainty, then they would not have trusted God, and lived accordingly.

We also read of hope in scripture. Look at the original language and the context of the passages it is used in. It is not, "Gee, I sure hope I am saved," or, "Gee, I sure hope I am right about this." It is a full trust in God's word that is bolstered by the indewlling of God.

My hope and faith are founded upon certainty.

Now, I think the implication is that I should have faith, but not be so certain of my doctrine, right?

Okay, I can understand that. How then, will you test my doctrine? Will you do so as one did earlier, by telling what wikipedia has to say about it?

That is a bit like me testing your belief in your car by saying, "But my car will not do that, so, I know yours cannot either." See what I mean? And because I am striving hard not to cram scripture down anyone's throat, or trying not to force my beliefs on anyone...I am simply responding to what is posted. But, if you care to test my doctrine...I am game.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Jesus was critical of the Pharrisees who poured over doctrine but lacked spiritualiy, was he not?

Bingo. But not just the Pharisees, but the Scribes, Sadducees, Levites (by implication) and Lawyers. Pretty much the religious rulers. And they were rulers, too. Just like today, they held powerful sway over the common man, and just like today, the common man is not excused: you have heard the saying, ignorance of the law is no excuse. This applies to scripture as well, I believe.

And what do the Gospels indicate was their problem? Just answer that one question for me.


(01-10-2011 08:26 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  I think it was the theologian Paul Tillich who state ----"In seeking to become Gods we may become less than men".

Not familiar with this Paul, but the one that I am familiar with said:

1 Timothy 4

1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;


2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;



The Paul you mention, by implying that men become gods, shows he is in direct contradiction with sound doctrine. These are they both Paul and Peter as well as Jude...spoke of.

Hope I have answered your questions, but now it is late, and I must say good night, but I do thank you for the (short) response.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2011, 10:58 AM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
(01-10-2011 11:50 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  You know the bible commands people to speak in tongues during church services, right? Whatever your personal opinion may be on it, it doesn't seem to align with the bible's respect for it (with the natural exception for women).

I have never found any place where we are commanded to speak in tongues but the Bible does forbid the practice if there is no one present who can interpret what is being said.

Quote:If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.
(1 Corinthians 14:27-28 ESV)

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes theophilus's post
03-10-2011, 11:15 AM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
Just wanted to add, for those who might be interested, at the bottom of the thread was a link (curiously enough) to a teaching on the gift of languages.
I post it only because it was curious that it would be there. Also, I did look at the link briefly, and from what I saw it seemed to represent what I would classify as sound, though I am not endorsing the teacher, at least, not until I have further researched his teaching.

I would also like to add to the discussion of xenoloalia which came up in a previous post indirectly, in response to "not being able to find links concerning the true gift of tongues" (which makes sense if this gift has, as many believe, ceased, thus no available material), I would just comment that it seems to carry, in the studies shown, a closer tie to reincarnation than to the gift of languages, and I would myself be inclined to dismiss it as irrelevant (at least the studies I looked at anyway) to the discussion. I myself reject the notion of reincarnation.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2011, 12:41 PM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
dfhlsdhflyrhlg dkgfkdbflsf sterieuriagd fygljdyroljsafyd ridfkldfhsrbd dfgsgfksd .....

[Image: boston-terrier-gets-scared.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like tazmin98's post
03-10-2011, 05:08 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2011 05:12 PM by Mr Woof.)
RE: Talking in Tongues.
(03-10-2011 11:15 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Just wanted to add, for those who might be interested, at the bottom of the thread was a link (curiously enough) to a teaching on the gift of languages.
I post it only because it was curious that it would be there. Also, I did look at the link briefly, and from what I saw it seemed to represent what I would classify as sound, though I am not endorsing the teacher, at least, not until I have further researched his teaching.

I would also like to add to the discussion of xenoloalia which came up in a previous post indirectly, in response to "not being able to find links concerning the true gift of tongues" (which makes sense if this gift has, as many believe, ceased, thus no available material), I would just comment that it seems to carry, in the studies shown, a closer tie to reincarnation than to the gift of languages, and I would myself be inclined to dismiss it as irrelevant (at least the studies I looked at anyway) to the discussion. I myself reject the notion of reincarnation.

S.T.
Hello S.T.
You are probaly aware that Reincarnation was an early Christian belief;it became anathema at an early conference that claimed it detracted from the doctrine of Grace.

I know of one church, Unity, that teaches reincarnation as part of its professed Christian profile.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2011, 06:21 AM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
I live in a daycare.....don't ask. Anyways. When at this daycare I noticed that all the kids (according to the bible) were touched by god because they all seemed to speak in tounges.
Now doesn't this sound funny? If one compares the "tounge" speaking of various religious people to the common bable of childeren, one will notice that IT"S EXACTLY THE FRIGGING SAME!
Pay attention people! (Not the people on this orum just the fools in general).

NEW AND IMPROVED!
Twice the anger, Half the space!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2011, 07:26 AM
RE: Talking in Tongues.
(03-10-2011 12:41 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  dfhlsdhflyrhlg dkgfkdbflsf sterieuriagd fygljdyroljsafyd ridfkldfhsrbd dfgsgfksd .....

Translation: I have nothing beneficial to contribute to this topic.

(03-10-2011 05:08 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Hello S.T.
You are probaly aware that Reincarnation was an early Christian belief;it became anathema at an early conference that claimed it detracted from the doctrine of Grace.

I know of one church, Unity, that teaches reincarnation as part of its professed Christian profile.

You might actually be correct that reincarnation was a belief held by some in the early Church, seeing that ecstatic speech was also improperly inserted into the early Church, but that is what the heart of the matter is: it was not early Church doctrine. That is what I try to bring to the table in many of these conversations: who and what the Church really is and practices as opposed to what the perceptions of the world are...they are two different things.

Ecstatic speech also was dealt with very early, 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 center on this unbiblical practice, contrasting it to the true gift of languages.

I have met members of a Unity Church, and it is probably the same organization. There beliefs are pretty much, from what I gathered in speaking to members (and this was on the job, in person) of that group, a hodge-podge of "Well, whatever way you want to interpret is okay, and doctrine can be conformed to suit the individual.

But please do not confuse theology like that with what the bible actually teaches. I would not go so far to say that their adherents are not, or cannot be saved, but, their doctine is in error, as there is absolutely no biblical basis for a belief in reincarnation, as it is "Appointed unto man once to die, and then comes judgment."

While there are exceptions to "the rule" at times, such as in the case of Enoch and Elijah (who's catching away is actually debated among believers, great presentations by both sides), the general rule that when man dies, his spirit departs this world, never to return.

(04-10-2011 06:21 AM)Hamata k Wrote:  I live in a daycare.....don't ask. Anyways. When at this daycare I noticed that all the kids (according to the bible) were touched by god because they all seemed to speak in tounges.
Now doesn't this sound funny? If one compares the "tounge" speaking of various religious people to the common bable of childeren, one will notice that IT"S EXACTLY THE FRIGGING SAME!
Pay attention people! (Not the people on this orum just the fools in general).

That is correct. Scientific study of ecstatic speech has been unable to identify speech pattern that might indicate that it is a speech. One of the arguments that those who engage and teach ecstatic speech as the "gift of languages" is that it is the language of Angels, despite the fact that every time Angels communicate with men, it is in the language of the men they are speaking to. It could be argued that it is the "language of Heaven," also, and that science and the natural minds of men that study ecstatic speech will not be able to identify this heavenly language might carry some weight, except that men of God have also looked into this matter, and have likewise found it to be unintelligible babble.

As I said early on in this thread, I suggest a look at the Oracle of Delphi, and the pagan practice which so closely resembles the practice of today in many churches.

To be fair, I have visited fellowships where they did follow biblical instruction, which resulted in "tongues" never being spoken, unlike the pandemonium found in some of the churches I visisted, where everybody (I kid you not) spoke in "a tongue" at the same time.

Another suggestion would be to read 1 Corinthians 14 (and this is just for those who are curious and approach matters in a scientific manner, looking at all relevant dats, and what is more relevant than the original instruction?) and note the use of the singular "tongue" and the plural "tongues."

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: