SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Does anyone know of a solid biblical response to MacArthur's sermons on tongues and spiritual gifts?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

HeyDave

"This debate is being focused around a woman (Brenda) who thinks it is her place to teach doctrinal truth and expound the sciptures to men, even correcting their understanding of the biblical text! The word of God says women are NOT permitted to teach or have authority over a man. 1 Timothy 2:12."

No, the focus of this discussion is not on me, I have only endeavoured to diligently respond to the avalanche - thanks Joan - that fell on me - and thanks to others for words of encouragement. I am afraid that there have been too many posts now to do that as before and I apologise but if there are some important points that I have missed please let me know. There can only be teaching if there are pupils - I am merely discussing according to my own light. The Lord gives light to men and to women and no-one is given full light.

snuf

I don`t thnk that non Pentecostals see the `breathing on` as the baptism. They see the Pentecostal baptism as their entrance into the Christian life rather than a later event. That is my understanding of how Calvinists see it. At the time I had not identified it as such and thought it was the baptism because of the profoundness of the change in me but only later when the real baptism came that I knew it as such.

"Consider the Jewish man who was from Arabia and hearing the disciple who was speaking in tongues his language, and then another speaking Latin say. Wouldn't the Arabian Jew think that the one speaking Latin be speaking gibberish, not understanding what he is saying? Because you don't understand the one who is speaking in tongues, does that mean that the gift is not genuine because you don't understand what is being said? How do you know it's not a known language of the day? Are you a linguistic?"

I think we all know when a real language is being spoken and when it is just a stream of oft repeated sylabbles and in fact liguists have studied tongue speaking and pronounce that it is not a language.

savannah

Your argument would hold better if Paul had used the same Greek words for cease in the case of tongues and fail in the case of the other gifts. He does not and it is for a reason. He is showing that perfection is not related to tongues because perfection is rather, related to maturity, completeness or holiness. The Greek word for perfect - `telios` is used in the NT in this way Mat 5:48, 1Cor 2:6, 14:20, Ephesians 4:13, Phil 3:15, 1Cor 2:6, 14:20, Eph 4:13, Phil 3:15, Col 1:28, Heb 5:14, James 1:4, 3:2.

He emphasises in 1Cor 13:11,12 that he is speaking of maturity when he talks about a child who becomes a man, when he speaks about face to face he means seeing things clearly. This was not something that was to happen at a later time, but already the apostles were perfect 1 Thes 2:10 and the kingdom of God had come in them.

rbanks

"I went back and read over this thread and because of Brenda’s experience with the charismatic’s and her reading of other errors in church history she has formed her belief that no one today can have a genuine baptism with the evidence of speaking in an unknown tongue to the one speaking. She is of the conclusion that Smith Wigglesworth and many of us on here that have received the baptism with the evidence of speaking in other tongues have received another spirit that is demonic."

It is primarily through my study of scripture that I hold my belief on tongues and it is also the belief of the majority of the church since the begining and all of the great missionaries in the past and the greatest revivalists were not tongue speakers so many claim, not baptised in the Spirit so most of the missionary work and the greatest writings in the church have been by unbaptised men so you say. They certainly had power and some were martyred for the sake of the gospel, yet they lived in a lower state according to tongue speakers.

It is not good scholarship nor is it honest to make claims that church history supports tongue speaking at large, when the writings of holiness teachers have been used who always supported the continuation of the gifts but not tongues.

"Where in the scriptures can you find any place that the Holy Spirit comes on anyone and they speak in tongues that they are to question it or even dare to call it demonic? The bible says not to get in danger of blaspheming the Holy Ghost because there is no forgiveness in this life or the next to those who end up doing it."

We are told to test the spirits over everything and this is why the Bereans were praised for doing this, even with the teaching of the apostle Paul, he did not expect them to just accept what he said. Testing the spirits is not blaspheming and the move to get people to accept what leaders say without this testing is just purely control and is not scriptural. I would say that the practise of testing was fully operational in those days and that is why there was no need to mention it as Paul had already established the protocol.

"what does the bible say about tongues?"

The Greek word for tongue is `glossa` and throughout the scriptures is used for either that physical part of our body or legitimate languages. It was never used for the ecstatic utterances which were found in pagan religions, for those the word `rhema` was used and Paul never used that word for the gift that the Holy Spirit was giving but he advised the exclusion of those from worship who did not have an interpreter of the languages spoken which would automatically exclude rhema speakers. In the passage from Acts, we are told that it was legitimate languages spoken. The interpretaion of tongues is better translated to mean `the translation of languages` and every other time the Greek word for interpretation is used, as in John 1:38,42, 9:7 Hebrews 7:2 Acts 9:36 (from First Corinthians by Knofel Staton) it is used to describe the translation of one language into another human language.

Brenda

 2010/5/21 2:37
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Paul begins his discourse in I Corinthians on the spirituals with this qualification:

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. (I Corinthians 12:3)

We see here that going forward in this context we are not merely talking about natural abilities, but abilities made possible by the Holy Spirit.

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. (I Corinthians 12:4)

The focus is still on the Spirit of God giving these 'gifts'. This is not human ability. The revelation gifts will be just that; Revelation. They cannot be understood to mean learning or logical deduction. They are Divine in origin.

To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. (I Corinthians 12:10-11)

So we see then that γλῶσσα (glossa) in this context is clearly a gift of the Spirit. It is NOT ecstatic speech as found in paganism, but is a language that God understands as surely as He understood the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar. As I have shown in an earlier post the Greek words for 'speaketh mysteries' find their first use in the book of Daniel. Again Paul writes:

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. (1Corinthians 14:2)

Again we have the identification as to the origin of the speaking; it is 'in the spirit.'

Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (I Corinthians 14:13-14)

My spirit that is alive unto God prays by the Holy Spirit. This is prayer that bypasses the intellect so as to pray in the Spirit according to the will of God. The act of praying in the Spirit is not a 'taking over' of us by the Holy Spirit because the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. This is the one side of the coin Paul speaks of next:

What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

So we see then from the context of the passages in question that Paul again refers to praying 'with' the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is involved in all of the gifts. To single out tongues from the gifts (spirituals) so as to make them either of human or demonic origin is an imposition on the text. It would be like going through the list of the fruit of the Spirit singling out JOY and then saying it was human or demonic in origin. God does not intentionally mislead His people. Simple hermeneutical rule? When the plain sense makes good sense seek no other sense.





_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2010/5/21 8:04Profile









 Re:

You know, I always hear in these threads that we should stick to "context". And believe we are missing that in Corinthians the 13th chapter.

Verse 8 says, "Charity NEVER faileth".

Look how the rest of that verse is reading.

"Whether" there be prophecies, knowledge and tongues, he is clearly grabbing a handful of examples but he chose these because this is what he was talking about in the last few chapters. He could have gone further and used many others, but he is pointing out, if we care to read to the end of the chapter, that NOW abideth faith, hope and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.

The putting away of childish things were the elementary rudiments, the weak and beggarly elements.

If we read further into chapter 14, Paul clearly says that in verse 3, "But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, exhortation, and comfort".

Now I ask, regardless of your doctrinal position, do men today not need edification, exhortation, and comfort? To which this gift clearly brings?

Verse 5 says, "I would that you all spoke with tongues, but rather that you prophesied: for GREATER is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except you interpret, that the Church may receive edification.

I ask again, does the Church today not need edification?

If we start doing away certain things in Pauls writings, what else can we conveniently do away with so we can intellectually do away with the gifts that would otherwise cause us to be beside ourselves?

Oh the heart and mind of man, both sinner and saint can be quite deceiving. The swirling around with words to mesmerise the simple and confuse these little ones, by removing and doing away with the gifts of the Spirit to suit one's own understanding without consulting God and thoroughly exhausting every scripture. Not thoroughly investigating theories of men, but the scriptures only. If we take out from the word of God that which we think does not exist today, we better leave the word of God alone until we get a more understanding of what certain passages mean. Because once we start taking things away from the word of God, that leads to more removals.

I am not mad, I truly am concerned.

 2010/5/21 8:40









 Re:

"So we see then that γλῶσσα (glossa) in this context is clearly a gift of the Spirit."

Of course, Robert the gift of languages that God gave the disiples at Pentecost was not their own natural ability. It says a gift and a gift it was.

"It is NOT ecstatic speech as found in paganism, but is a language that God understands as surely as He understood the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar"

Exactly it was not pagan speech and should not be thought of now as such but anyone who listens to it knows that the same sounds are just repeated ad infinitum. It is indistinguishable from the utterances one will hear from pagans using it today.

"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. (1Corinthians 14:2)"

Paul is confirming that an `unknown tongue` which is not a language, is not understood by man and only God knows what is going on in the mind of the utterer.

Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (I Corinthians 14:13-14)

It was common for those who followed the pagan religions in those times that deities took over the human spirit and the understanding or the mind departed from the person. So it was common for people to think that the spirit spoke without the mind in those who were speaking in a foreign language. Buit God does not work that way as Paul is pointing out, God does not bypass the mind the way that the false god`s of the Greeks did. We should not bypass the mind when they are using His gift of speaking in foreign languages.

"What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."

Paul demonstrates that God gives the understanding so that one is not like the pagans.

 2010/5/21 8:57
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."

Paul demonstrates that God gives the understanding so that one is not like the pagans.



Lets do the math:

If man + tongues = pagan utterance

Then Paul + tongues = pagan utterance

Notice the personal pronoun here:

I thank 2168 my 3450 God 2316, I speak 2980 with tongues 1100 more than 3123 ye 5216 all 3956: (I Corinthians 14:15)

This is 'I' and 'ye'. If your logic is correct, the Corinthians were moving in the demonic- but Paul thanked God he was more demonic than all of them.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2010/5/21 9:27Profile









 Re:

We can only understand what Paul is saying in his letter to the Corinthian church if we put it in the context of that society which was a very paganistic one and moreover, Greek. Greeks have the reputation of being an irrational people. So here we have a group of people who have been given the Pentecostal gift of speaking in foreign languages as in the book of Acts, as a sign gift for unbelieving Jews primarily, and some of them previously possibly did worship the deities and have ecstatic utterances but the practice anyway was widespread which is why it was the Corinthian church that needed instruction for them to understand the difference with the gift that came from God and not the Greek gods as Paul makes plain in verse 22.

So the difference is that the tongue given from God is perfectly legible when one asks Him for the intrepretation verse 13. Does this sound like the tongue practise taking place today? Does the person understand and then tell others what he said who did not have that mother tongue?

Paul says in contrast "what shall I profit you except that I speak to you either by revelation knowledge prophecy or doctrine" emphasising that unknown words are not to be spoken such as those ecstatic utterances of the pagans. For how shall it be known what is piped or harped?

"So likewise ye except ue utter by the tongue words easy to understand, how shall it be known what is spoken for ye shall speak to the air" v 9 which is exactly what ecstatic utterances are.

 2010/5/21 9:30









 Re:

Quote:
I think we all know when a real language is being spoken and when it is just a stream of oft repeated syllables and in fact linguists have studied tongue speaking and pronounce that it is not a language.



1 Cor 14:11

Not everyone knows.

When I hear the Chinese speak, to me it's pure gibberish. "Chong, yong, dong, ding". The only Chinese I know of is Sweet and Sour Chicken, Garlic Spare Ribs, and Egg Foo Young.

 2010/5/21 9:31
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
So the difference is that the tongue given from God is perfectly legible when one asks Him for the intrepretation verse 13. Does this sound like the tongue practise taking place today?



How do you make that square with I Corinthians 14:2? I have left the strongs numbers for reference sake.

For 1063 he that speaketh 2980 in an [unknown] tongue 1100 speaketh 2980 not 3756 unto men 444, but 235 unto God 2316: for 1063 no man 3762 understandeth 191 [him]; howbeit 1161 in the spirit 4151 he speaketh 2980 mysteries 3466. (I Corinthians 14:2)

Again, no man understands the mysteries. The word for 'mysteries' is the same word used several times (as I listed) in the Book of Daniel to denote a mystery of God that required an interpreter. Without the interpretation the dream was such that the recipient knew it was from God- but did not know the meaning. God-ward tongues (glossa) is no different. They are directed to God, but we can eaves drop on the message if we have the interpretation. Again, I see this happening as Paul testified of the Spirit speaking in every city of trials that awaited him, etc.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2010/5/21 9:37Profile









 Re:

Robert wrote


"I thank 2168 my 3450 God 2316, I speak 2980 with tongues 1100 more than 3123 ye 5216 all 3956: (I Corinthians 14:15)

This is 'I' and 'ye'. If your logic is correct, the Corinthians were moving in the demonic- but Paul thanked God he was more demonic than all of them."

Paul being highly educated spoke a number of languages and this is what he saying. He was in a superior position when hearing languages used as a gift as he probably knew already a number of them.


 2010/5/21 9:38









 Re:

Robert wrote

"Tongues is a God-wards phenomena in prayer containing revelation just like prophesy. The difference is that tongues can be interpreted so as to provide insight into what the Spirit is praying on our behalf."

In Acts we have the purpose of tongues, that they were a man-ward phenomena of a sign so Paul is saying that the misuse of tongues is in not speaking to men. Only God can know then what the meaning is and that is not what God intended for the gift. Paul points out further that prophecy is edifying rather than the practice of speaking in utterances of pagan origin . The mysteries of God no longer need an interpreter as we have the mind of Christ or rather those who are in Christ do and the mysteries are revealed.

 2010/5/21 9:50





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy