Speaking in tongues
-
Originally posted by fandango:I am very glad to have someone in this thread with the same sentiments and teaching.
If you read the whole context of the chapter, the tongues speaking in Acts 2 are tongues of dialects during the time of Acts, or in laymen terms, different languages like French, German, Dutch, Japanese if applied to modern day idealogy.
Once again if you read the whole context of 1 Cor 14, it talk about the so called "angelic tongues" of the Apostles. In whole it teaches that tongues during that age, are gift granted by the Holy Spirit only for the authentication of the Apostles - Paul, Peter etc. The same chapter talks about the study of Prophecy being superior to tongues.
The end of Apostleship after Revelation teaches an immediate ceasation of Prophecy and tongue speaking.
The key is to read all Scripture with the context, and not taking verses and explaining them out-of-context.
This study of tongue speaking is one of the fundamental doctrine that differentiate churches. (We can hold a full 5 day camp just to focus on this doctrine). Nonetheless, i like to post this question to all for some thoughts since someone mentioned about the similarity of the tongue speaking and chanting of mediums.
If you agree that the chantings are not of God,thus of the Devil, when you speak or pray in tongues, how do you genuine know that the so called "spirit" is of God, and not of the Devil ?
I would like to hear the opinions.
I will be happy to give my opinions as long as it is understood that they ARE OPINIONS and does not represent any church in general.
I fear that "new-age" Christians leaders have been extremely liberal in extracting verses in support of their causes and fads.
Proponents of such beliefs will usually quote "new revelations" or such similar terminologies to enforce new methodology.
Similar, over the past few years, there was the emphasis of cell-groups, children's church etc. While there is really nothing wrong for one to join a cell group or to emphasize that children, too, should learn to worship. It becomes questionable, when a church which embarks in such activities theologise or spiritualise the activity.
A supporter of a cell group church will quote that in Acts, Christians meet in house churches, hence the validity. A children's church proponent will quote a verse from the Gospel stating that Christ admonished the disciples who were pushing the children away. A practitioner of the children's worship will quote Miriam's song and tambourine routine (in Deuteronomy) to support the use of such a musical instrument plus banners and streamers.
To take verses out of context is like to insist that we should all wear sandals 'cos Jesus commanded the disciples to shake the dust of the sandals when the leave the towns that do not take in the message.
Footnote: I am not against tongues, CGs, children's church, singing etc. I am just against the "theologizing" of programmes. -
yah..when Jesus preached..there's no scriptural clues that He gave 'altar call'
-
You are right... but not really an issue with me as long as no one comes along and say that "no altar call, not Christian". Other than myself, none of my immediate family responded to an "altar call". They are all Christians too.
Many years ago, my church embarked on this journey to change the church into a "cell-group church" and used materials from a locally well known charismatic church, made some leaders, including myself attend CG leaders training. Of course, being the pain-in-the-neck that I am, I questioned the teachings of the materials. One of the issues, if the cell-group concept becomes a theology, ie, a God-given commandment, we might as well stop going on Sunday to the concrete structure called church. We should also fire our pastors 'cos we don't really need them anymore.
Fortunately, after a couple of painful years and the departure of the pastor who pioneered this movement, my church now is called "a church with cell groups" and not "cell group church".
The CG ministry is a good programme but it is not really theology. -
agreed. Bible-believing Christians need to know the Word well and not theologised every Christian thing they see. We admit not everything we do in my church is found in the Bible...but we do not claim that in the first place but rather the things we do aims to edify and build people.Originally posted by Chin Eng:You are right... but not really an issue with me as long as no one comes along and say that "no altar call, not Christian". Other than myself, none of my immediate family responded to an "altar call". They are all Christians too.
Many years ago, my church embarked on this journey to change the church into a "cell-group church" and used materials from a locally well known charismatic church, made some leaders, including myself attend CG leaders training. Of course, being the pain-in-the-neck that I am, I questioned the teachings of the materials. One of the issues, if the cell-group concept becomes a theology, ie, a God-given commandment, we might as well stop going on Sunday to the concrete structure called church. We should also fire our pastors 'cos we don't really need them anymore.
Fortunately, after a couple of painful years and the departure of the pastor who pioneered this movement, my church now is called "a church with cell groups" and not "cell group church".
The CG ministry is a good programme but it is not really theology. -
I have no objections to cell group, youth group,fellowship groupor however you call them.
It's what you do in them. Is it aseesion of edification from the Word of God? Or issit just a get together session to have fun, play games, share personal experiences, and a maybe little bit of Scripture reading.
This, i think, are the actual roots why the practice of tongues penetrate the churches. Correct teaching and interpretations of the Word are nowadays underestimated by many people. This same group of people believe that the experience of the Holy Spirit 9orsomeother spirit),and experience supercedes the need to preach from the Word.
That's a huge stumbling blocks for many. -
I have no objections to cell group, youth group,fellowship groupor however you call them.
It's what you do in them. Is it a session of edification from the Word of God? Or issit just a get together session to have fun, play games, share personal experiences, and a maybe little bit of Scripture reading.
This, i think, are the actual roots why the practice of tongues penetrate the churches. Correct teaching and interpretations of the Word are nowadays underestimated by many people. This same group of people believe that the experience of the Holy Spirit 9orsomeother spirit),and experience supercedes the need to preach from the Word.
That's a huge stumbling blocks for many. -
Just a thought....
Do you guys think that the "theologising" of programme and methodology is a mean to get everyone to toll the line?
Meaning, once a church leader/pastor quotes from a verse, everyone is suppose to follow without question? -
Don't quite understand 'theologising of programme and methodology ... everyone to toll the line'.Originally posted by Chin Eng:Just a thought....
Do you guys think that the "theologising" of programme and methodology is a mean to get everyone to toll the line?
Meaning, once a church leader/pastor quotes from a verse, everyone is suppose to follow without question?
Follow without question? Certainly not, but compare what he says to the scripture.Acts 17
10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. -
sorry, maybe not so clear.....
What I meant was - a church or church leader/pastor wants a programme done, he quotes a verse and claims it is Biblical. Everyone is to follow because it is a command and if you don't follow, you sin.
Years back, when my church embarked on the CG ministry thing, there were lots of quotation from the book of Acts. There were claims that because the disciples back then had house churches, so should we. So everyone was placed into CGs, again because the disciples did it. To me, for most parts, Acts is a book of history. Things happened, period. Not to be misconstrued as a God-given commandment.
Then there was another incident where congregational members were told that they should NOT be serving (doing other things) during worship time 'cos that was the time to worship. Passage quoted was the Mary and Martha story where Martha complained about Mary not helping etc etc. The end result was that there were no more Sunday School teachers 'cos everyone believe in that particular preaching and decided that it was wrong to "work" during worship service.
Recently I was told that the purpose for learning "sign-language" for worship is so that we can "worship using our entire body". Just don't get it. It is not like we learn sign language to minister to the deaf and dumb. I'd rather learn Braille to worship quietly....
So at the end of the day, are verses used indiscriminately to push programmes and fads??? If it is so, isn't it using the Bible in vain? -
i believe if some1 spoke in tongues, they should have an interpreter.Originally posted by songs:Neontetra: can i clarify with you on this topic.. very sticky topic. Frm what i know.. not everybody will have the gift of tongues. Each has his own spiritual gifts. Besides the main 7 spiritual gifts (or is it more.. can't remember) , people can be given other gifts like pastoring or empathy,etc.
Even for tongues to be recognised, there must be certain creterias to be met... e.g.: there must always be an interpreter to intrprete what the person speaking in tongues is saying. this was what i learnt.
anyone can shed some insight pls?
i have seen churches where the members were speaking in tongues n all of a sudden, they burst into laughter & some were even crying..... -
btw, did you know that tongues actually ceased and resurfaced at 1900s?
-
Chin Eng, I agree with you on Acts being a historical book. Acts is not a "pratical" book....errmm...i guess you know what i am trying to say. That is all practice in Acts are not to be mimiced now.
If the pastor/leader is trying to push through something based on just a single verse, and he keeps trying and trying to push it, i would think that there are some other hidden secret motives behind all this. Just dun support him. -
1900s - The pentecostal movement.
Azusa Street Revival is one of history's most significant encounter. -
No worries in the support deparment. I do not support "people", only "reasons".Originally posted by fandango:Chin Eng, I agree with you on Acts being a historical book. Acts is not a "pratical" book....errmm...i guess you know what i am trying to say. That is all practice in Acts are not to be mimiced now.
If the pastor/leader is trying to push through something based on just a single verse, and he keeps trying and trying to push it, i would think that there are some other hidden secret motives behind all this. Just dun support him.
You have no idea how many people I've offended because I refuse to give such kind of support.
I have seen too many "causes" pushed solely on the basis of a couple of questionable verses. -
We know that anyone may quote scripture for their cause and use, so there is the need to return to the source and understand the message of the verses in context. Beyond reading the passages and capturing in totality the teaching and its background, we may ask / search for other passages of similar context that supports the directive at hand.Originally posted by Chin Eng:sorry, maybe not so clear.....
What I meant was - a church or church leader/pastor wants a programme done, he quotes a verse and claims it is Biblical. Everyone is to follow because it is a command and if you don't follow, you sin.
Years back, when my church embarked on the CG ministry thing, there were lots of quotation from the book of Acts. There were claims that because the disciples back then had house churches, so should we. So everyone was placed into CGs, again because the disciples did it. To me, for most parts, Acts is a book of history. Things happened, period. Not to be misconstrued as a God-given commandment.
Then there was another incident where congregational members were told that they should NOT be serving (doing other things) during worship time 'cos that was the time to worship. Passage quoted was the Mary and Martha story where Martha complained about Mary not helping etc etc. The end result was that there were no more Sunday School teachers 'cos everyone believe in that particular preaching and decided that it was wrong to "work" during worship service.
Recently I was told that the purpose for learning "sign-language" for worship is so that we can "worship using our entire body". Just don't get it. It is not like we learn sign language to minister to the deaf and dumb. I'd rather learn Braille to worship quietly....
So at the end of the day, are verses used indiscriminately to push programmes and fads??? If it is so, isn't it using the Bible in vain?
Remembering that we are to submit to authority placed aboved us, you may wish to speak to the leadership and ask for an explanation to aid your understanding of their position. If the issue is unclear (bearing the lack of specifics within scripture) then my stab would be that it is probably not a cardinal matter.
Having said the above, what is imperative is the relationship with God, not the technicalities or ceremonial efforts. To be caught up in the practise of methods foremost established to edify us in our walk with God would sadly have trapped us from the essence instead. Keep on praying.
This is my opinion, do add or right me if i am incorrect. -
I think its good when our practices trace its background from the Bible. There's nothing wrong to quote a verse to everything we do..but do label church activities with scripture like labelling products in supermarket with price tags. If the Bible's examples have nothing to do with our present teaching and Christian ministry..then the Bible is merely another historically divine inspired book? I believe the age-less Word of God...as primitive as it may sound at times, is able to be put into usage today.Originally posted by Chin Eng:sorry, maybe not so clear.....
What I meant was - a church or church leader/pastor wants a programme done, he quotes a verse and claims it is Biblical. Everyone is to follow because it is a command and if you don't follow, you sin.
Years back, when my church embarked on the CG ministry thing, there were lots of quotation from the book of Acts. There were claims that because the disciples back then had house churches, so should we. So everyone was placed into CGs, again because the disciples did it. To me, for most parts, Acts is a book of history. Things happened, period. Not to be misconstrued as a God-given commandment.
Then there was another incident where congregational members were told that they should NOT be serving (doing other things) during worship time 'cos that was the time to worship. Passage quoted was the Mary and Martha story where Martha complained about Mary not helping etc etc. The end result was that there were no more Sunday School teachers 'cos everyone believe in that particular preaching and decided that it was wrong to "work" during worship service.
Recently I was told that the purpose for learning "sign-language" for worship is so that we can "worship using our entire body". Just don't get it. It is not like we learn sign language to minister to the deaf and dumb. I'd rather learn Braille to worship quietly....
So at the end of the day, are verses used indiscriminately to push programmes and fads??? If it is so, isn't it using the Bible in vain?
-
There is nothing wrong in tracing our beliefs to Biblical verses. The problem is when there is enforcement, meaning you got to follow or you are sinning, then it becomes questionable.
Simply put, worshipping on Sunday is an accepted practice. Occasionally we may miss it for some reason or other. No issue.
But when one says: you got to join a cell group because it is stated in the Bible in Acts, and if you don't you do not get baptised, married, etc, it becomes really, really warp.
Apparently one cell group in my church got killed by the pastor 'cos the cell group leader did not have the time to attend a cg leader's training. This issue has to be seen in the light that the church has been conducting CG leader's training year in year out depending on who is the lead pastor and the inclination he leans towards (which school/material for CGs). -
i see...ya....we shouldnt make every thing in church a doctrine and make it sounds like we r not under grace...but under more laws.Originally posted by Chin Eng:There is nothing wrong in tracing our beliefs to Biblical verses. The problem is when there is enforcement, meaning you got to follow or you are sinning, then it becomes questionable.
Simply put, worshipping on Sunday is an accepted practice. Occasionally we may miss it for some reason or other. No issue.
But when one says: you got to join a cell group because it is stated in the Bible in Acts, and if you don't you do not get baptised, married, etc, it becomes really, really warp.
Apparently one cell group in my church got killed by the pastor 'cos the cell group leader did not have the time to attend a cg leader's training. This issue has to be seen in the light that the church has been conducting CG leader's training year in year out depending on who is the lead pastor and the inclination he leans towards (which school/material for CGs). -
Just a question. Can you guys share with us how you managed to speak in tongue? How long it takes you to be able to receive the gift from God?
How do we ask God for this gift? Thru prayers? -
If that is a gift, it should be given by G-d, how can you ask for it?
But I think god biased lah. He enjoys communicating with charismatic pastors and their followers. Speaks with the pastor regularly ("yesterday the Lord told me, revealed to me blah blah ...") and blesses the followers with the gift of the tongue.
Think staunch protestants like fandango want also cannot get ... but the amateur christian in charismatic church has tongue that flows like river .. haiz -
huh!?Originally posted by Icemoon:If that is a gift, it should be given by G-d, how can you ask for it?
But I think god biased lah. He enjoys communicating with charismatic pastors and their followers. Speaks with the pastor regularly ("yesterday the Lord told me, revealed to me blah blah ...") and gives the followers the give of the tongue.
Think staunch protestants like fadango want also cannot get ... but the amateur christian in charismatic church has tongue that flows like river .. haiz
-
Speaking of tongues.... wat will they be thinking next
Everyone can speak in tongues man. It is gibbertish. Just try to make some sounds with your throat tat is not tangible and it is a "tongue". Interpreter ? why don't we do a litmus test ? Someone utter some "tongue" and recorded down on tape and write down its meanings. Let an interpreter listen to the tape and see if he can derive out the intended message. Can tis be achievable ? If not how does the interpreter "interprete" if he don't even know wat is he trying to say ?
"Tongue" as learning a new language ? Don't bet on it. I do not believe tat someone who had never hear Japanese or speak Japanese like natives can learn it within... well, one second. Is it possible ? Then all the people who had learned Japanese ought to shoot themselves for spending so much years of effort learning a new language. In fact most can't even manage to speak fluently in the new foreign languages after years of studies.
I end my mesage with a "angelic tongue". Hey, I can even write "tongue" !
"aks jgdfkjfg dhf dhfgfdj khgfjdhg fdjkg hdkj dkjfhkdjfgdf."
It means "World Peace" -
Another litmus test
Why don't some people who claims tat he had inherit "tongue" speak in a tape recorder while some numbers of "buddhist" or "free thinker" utter some sounds similar to the "tongue" and see if the interpreter can know which one is the real "tongue" or not ? -
Hi SIS, so that's what you know about bibilcal tongues, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion. While generously sharing with us your sentiments, I'd like to politely urge you to exercise restraint and respect, even if you cannot agree with or fathom the subject. I believe you are rational enough to comprehend this, and leash up your proclivity to ridicule.
The posting guidelines shall be ready to assist all soon. I may not have the time for lengthy exchanges / posts, but I'll avail myself to keep this ground hospitable. Thank you for your understanding. -
Anyone wanna share how to achieve it or receive it? Somebody??