Is The Holy Spirit Being Withdrawn?

[Twilight II]

[He does not allow Satan to attack His adoptive children, Jesus was clear on that.

So Satan is not allowed to tempt or interfere with Christians?

Is that what you are saying?

[BibleOnly]

Jesus taught more about the Holy Spirit than anything else throughout the gospels.

Not once did He maintain that tongues were a sign.

[BibleOnly]

Originally Posted By: BibleOnly

[He does not allow Satan to attack His adoptive children, Jesus was clear on that.

So Satan is not allowed to tempt or interfere with Christians?

Is that what you are saying?

We can of course choose to believe a lie, there are always backsliders. But no, Satan CANNOT answer when people call on God, nor can he attack people with real world events, when they are looking to God. His power is words and empty ideas, but we are drawn by our own lusts and enticed, and it is our actions that separate us from the Gospel. Satan cannot do that.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

Amen

You know, I know this is an SDA forum. I expect that most people will agree with this. But, you would post 'amen' as if that will add weight to what was said in the face of the scriptures that prove it's not true ? Can you explain why Paul wrote that a man speaking in tongues does not speak to men, but God, as no man understands him ?

If you currently speak in "tongues" it will not matter how much scripture I show you.

You will force it to fit your paradigm.

The same way you did when you were shown that the gift of the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit was given in the upper room.

Jesus said "receive", then breathed.

He breathed "life" into them.

He breathed the Holy Spirit into them.

They were "born again".

Right there, in the upper room, as the Bible states.

But you cannot accept that, because it does not fit your paradigm.

With that in mind, why would I go further in this discussion with you, when you are so blinded by your beliefs that you cannot even accept this very simple truth?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

We can of course choose to believe a lie' date=' there are always backsliders. But no, Satan CANNOT answer when people call on God, nor can he attack people with real world events, when they are looking to God. His power is words and empty ideas, but we are drawn by our own lusts and enticed, and it is our actions that separate us from the Gospel. Satan cannot do that.

Quote:

1Jo 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Do not believe every spirit.

Quote:

1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Satan is a real adversary seeking Christians to destroy.

Quote:

Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in [their'] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

He tempted Jesus with scripture...

[BibleOnly]

If you currently speak in "tongues" it will not matter how much scripture I show you.

You will force it to fit your paradigm.

The same way you did when you were shown that the gift of the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit was given in the upper room.

Jesus said "receive", then breathed.

He breathed "life" into them.

He breathed the Holy Spirit into them.

They were "born again".

Right there, in the upper room, as the Bible states.

But you cannot accept that, because it does not fit your paradigm.

With that in mind, why would I go further in this discussion with you, when you are so blinded by your beliefs that you cannot even accept this very simple truth?

Well, to recap:

it does not say they were born again. In acts 10, Peter refers to Acts 2, not Jesus breathing on them as 'the beginning'. Another point I've made over and over and you've never answered

Beyond that, my other unanswered question is, if Jesus is not appearing to breathe on you, what pattern can we take from this scripture ? Where does the Bible say you can recieve the Spirit twice in two different ways ? Do we need both to fulfill 'if any man has not the Spirit of Christ he is none of His' ? Isn't it safer to assume that it means 'all the way' and not 'half way', assuming we accept your assumptions ?

I'm not sure why you'd go further in talking about your beliefs without justifying them from scripture, but something seems to be motivating you

[BibleOnly]

Quote:

1Jo 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Do not believe every spirit.

[Lysimachus]

It's my experience that YouTube is the home of crackpots, especially when used for 'education'. Anything from the Bilderberg group to extreme vegans are catered for.

This is my fear, you want to throw opinions at me, but do not allow me to discuss them. If I disagree, then I am just recalcitrant and not to be engaged ?

I've been given a DVD on tongues by an SDA member. It was quite ignorant, and I mean that kindly. The people presenting plainly had no idea and worked hard to shoehorn their misconceptions in to scripture. I will read with an open mind, but I think if it's so clear, that you should be able to explain it without requiring an external link.

Oh trust me, I am well able. I've done more than my share. I'm just trying to save my fingers a little, lol. I've got heavy conversations going on in about 4 other online forums right now, not to mention trying to do my home-based business at the same time. Ugh. >.<

[BibleOnly]

Well, it's up to you if you're over extending yourself, I guess.

[Lysimachus]

I am not going to comment on this in depth as you've said you will not answer. However, it's clear this article is well written for it's intended audience, people who don't speak in tongues and want to be told that it's not real, and don't know the scriptures on the topic well enough to see the flaws in his statements.

I will say, I can't help that someone says that tongues is to hide what we pray from the Devil, but the Bible does not say that. Instead it says we do it because WE don't know what to pray for.

At the core, the author ignores a lot of scripture but none more than this:

1Cr 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

1Cr 14:15 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.

and even more so:

1Cr 14:2 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.

Tongues are understood only by God. Paul says this and on this basis, this entire article is based on a false premise.

You do realize that the Corinthian church was guilty of this false speaking in tongues that we see today?

Paul is being gentle with this church, slowly and surely trying to steer them away from this deception.

He's trying to help them see that there is nothing to it. Read the entire context of 1 Corinthians 11-14 carefully, and you will see that Paul did not consider this kind of tongues as anything important.

[BibleOnly]

"You do realize that the Corinthian church was guilty of this false speaking in tongues that we see today?"

Where does it say that ? Why does it say 'forbid not tongues' and not 'stop false tongues' ? In all this, why not just stop it, or at least explain the difference between 'false' and real tongues ? Where does the Bible even say there are 'false tongues' ?

"Paul is being gentle with this church, slowly and surely trying to steer them away from this deception."

He was gently steering them away from using the gift of tongues for their own glory, all speaking in tongues at once. That is what it says.

"He's trying to help them see that there is nothing to it. Read the entire context of 1 Corinthians 11-14 carefully, and you will see that Paul did not consider this kind of tongues as anything important"

Just a 'sign to unbelievers', how we 'pray in the Spirit', and something they should 'forbid not' ? Oh, and a way to 'give thanks well' ? I'm sure there's more, that's just off the top of my head. I am willing to bet I've read 1 Cor 11-14 a lot more than you have :-)

[Lysimachus]

A careful analysis of Paul's concern was that the Corinthian church began to fall into the false manifestation of tongues. Paul, in his effort to try and slowly, and gently steer the Church away from such a heresy, helped them see that they need to cease this new form of "tongues" that they were practicing. That's why he said "unknown tongue". Read 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14 carefully, and you will see Paul's concern.

The "babbling" speaking Churches today are just that -- a continuation of the false version of the gift of tongues that began in Corinth.

[Lysimachus]

Read the context of 1 Cor 12-14 in its entirety:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Cor%2012-14&version=NASB

The reason why "tongues" was for unbelievers, and not believers, was because the entire purpose of tongues was to communicate to them in the language that they understood!!!

So that they could understand!

Remember, the Churches that Paul established were from "every nation under heaven"! They all needed interpreting.

When one spoke in a different tongue (language), an interpreter was needed for the others who did not understand that language.

The gift of tongues, however, did not require interpreting. Because the gift of tongues was manifested in 2 different ways:

1. You could suddenly speak in the foreign language of your audience

or...

2. You could only speak in your own language, but everyone in your audience from different nations all heard you in their own language!

Today, it is an even lesser gift. The gift of tongues was only a tool to communicate the gospel. That was all it was good for. That is why Paul put it at the bottom of the list!

Today we have extremely proficient ways of translating for people. This is why Paul admonishes us to seek the gift of prophecy. Tongues was at the bottom of the scale.

[BibleOnly]

Read the context of 1 Cor 12-14 in its entirety:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Cor%2012-14&version=NASB

The reason why "tongues" was for unbelievers, and not believers, was because the entire purpose of tongues was to communicate to them in the language that they understood!!!

So that they could understand!

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

Read the context of 1 Cor 12-14 in its entirety:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Cor%2012-14&version=NASB

The reason why "tongues" was for unbelievers, and not believers, was because the entire purpose of tongues was to communicate to them in the language that they understood!!!

So that they could understand!

Then why are we not to speak in tongues without an interpreter ?

[BibleOnly]

You're just fighting the Bible here.

"If you speak English, and your audience is Chinese, you are not supposed to speak English to them unless you have an interpreter that can translate from English to Chinese for them."

But, that would not be speaking in tongues, it would be speaking in my language. And there is no record of tongues meaning 'I speak Chinese and can interpret', rather we speak in tongues to God, not men, and interpret through asking for the gift.

"Sorry, I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this question. Clarify perhaps? "

Apart from the fact that the Bible never describes the mechanisms you are talking about, they make no sense. 1 Cor 12-14 is about operation of tongues in the church. If this is speaking Chinese for those who don't speak English, how did that Chinese speaker end up in my church and why did they sit through a service in English, to get to the point where we will speak Chinese, under inspiration of God ?

"Don't say it is bizarre. You are hurting yourself. I have presented this message to people who spoke in unintelligible tongues, and it blew them away. They said "i have been deceived! It is SOO CLEAR!" and they gave it up. These were people who spoke in tongues. 2 evangelical people I helped, and shared exactly what I'm telling you, and they could see it. The second one had a much harder time, and it took him a while to get over it."

There are always backsliders and weak minded people. This is why it's important for every Christian to know what the Bible says, so they cannot be easily fooled. I am sure we have ex SDA people in my church, now speaking in tongues. I'd never claim this proves I am right, because the weight of numbers does not do that, only the Bible is right.

"It's not a matter of "no record of example 2 exists". It's a matter of understanding the history of true tongues. Numerous stories in the past have been presented, where when one is speaking in their native language, the foreign audience distinctly hears it in their language. Wonderful missionary story miracles of this have been told."

Remember my name here ? BibleOnly. I don't care about heresay, it cannot redefine what God has said.

"1 Cor 12:28 - "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."

To the degree that this is talking about priority, it's obviously talking about use of tongues in the church. Tongues is also the sign of the Spirit, and how we pray in the Spirit. Sure, in the church, other gifts are more useful, but God has not given a useless gift. Paul was writing to the Corinthians, who you said had great need of tongues as they had lots of languages present. So, why did Paul list tongues last, to them ?

"We should be far more concerned about the gift of prophecy. "

Relative to a church meeting, yes. 1 cor 14 says this. But it also says we can all prophecy, and says to seek prophecy, AND forbid not tongues.

"God does not want His people uttering unintelligible gibberish into the air!"

No, God wants us to let the Spirit give us the words, for we know not what to pray for, as we ought. Again, you can't tell stories that defeat what the Bible says.

1Cr 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

1Cr 1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

1Cr 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

1Cr 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

I know that what God is doing seems silly to the natural mind, but that is His plan, not ours.

[Twilight II]

Acts 2

Quote:

Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Act 2:5 ¶ And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Act 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Here it states that they began to speak in tongues.

And then it clearly describes what those tongues are.

There are no "unknown" tongues here.

Now what were you referring to Bibleonly, when you state the "beginning" was in Acts 2.

[BibleOnly]

I'm not sure what the issue here is. No matter what I say, you don't take any of it in. Yes, I have noted that the reason people without any experience of the Gospel get confused, is that in Acts 2, it does state some of the tongues were understood. But, Peter got up and preached, the tongues were NOT a tool for preaching. Yet, Paul says that no man understands tongues.

1Cr 14:2 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.

My approach to understanding the Bible is this. If my interpretation of one verse requires another verse to be a lie, I assume I am wrong. According to Paul, the usual thing is for only God to understand tongues. I agree, the Bible does not explain why this was different in Acts 2, but it does specifically explain that it was. In Acts 10 and 19, there were no people who could not understand the language being used, but tongues was still the sign of the Spirit. As it always is.

"There are no "unknown" tongues here."

Act 2:13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

Apparently some people thought they were not speaking real languages at all.

"Now what were you referring to Bibleonly, when you state the "beginning" was in Acts 2."

I understand why you don't know these parts of the Bible well, you've just never thought about them.

Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

He is talking about Acts 10, where it also says:

Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Both times, it's clear that the receiving of the Holy Spirit is tied to speaking in tongues, and that this was the sign that made them realise that this is what had occurred.

The other thing to note here is that when the Bible talks about 'believing', this is also tied to the gift of tongues. It's not enough to believe in 'a' Jesus, you need to believe in the one of the Bible, the one who gives evidence.

[Twilight II]

I'm not sure what the issue here is. No matter what I say, you don't take any of it in. Yes, I have noted that the reason people without any experience of the Gospel get confused, is that in Acts 2, it does state some of the tongues were understood. But, Peter got up and preached, the tongues were NOT a tool for preaching. Yet, Paul says that no man understands tongues.

1Cr 14:2 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.

My approach to understanding the Bible is this. If my interpretation of one verse requires another verse to be a lie, I assume I am wrong. According to Paul, the usual thing is for only God to understand tongues. I agree, the Bible does not explain why this was different in Acts 2, but it does specifically explain that it was. In Acts 10 and 19, there were no people who could not understand the language being used, but tongues was still the sign of the Spirit. As it always is.

"There are no "unknown" tongues here."

Act 2:13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

Apparently some people thought they were not speaking real languages at all.

"Now what were you referring to Bibleonly, when you state the "beginning" was in Acts 2."

I understand why you don't know these parts of the Bible well, you've just never thought about them.

Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

He is talking about Acts 10, where it also says:

Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Both times, it's clear that the receiving of the Holy Spirit is tied to speaking in tongues, and that this was the sign that made them realise that this is what had occurred.

The other thing to note here is that when the Bible talks about 'believing', this is also tied to the gift of tongues. It's not enough to believe in 'a' Jesus, you need to believe in the one of the Bible, the one who gives evidence.

The beginning is referring to the "beginning" of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Granted, "tongues" accompanied the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on many occassions.

But as has been shown already, they were "other" languages.

And they were never a "required" sign.

As to your "drunk" reference, some could not understand what they were saying, whilst others could.

Those that coud not understand the different languages accused the disciples of being drunk.

Whilst others were amazed they could speak in another language.

[Twilight II]

Are you open to the idea that you could have been deceived and that the "tongues" you speak are not from God Bibleonly?

[BibleOnly]

The beginning is referring to the "beginning" of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

[Lysimachus]

You're starting to ramble BibleOnly. I have not even read your last few posts as it is getting weary. Your rationalizations are going nowhere.

[BibleOnly]

This is known as cognitive dissonance. You've never answered me on why you contradict Paul, but your brain has to defend itself from ideas it does not like, so you tell yourself that you're justified in not responding. If you don't want to talk, then stop, that is your choice. If you want to talk, then you need to address the scriptures that contradict your views.

[Lysimachus]

I can answer your objections, but I have a hunch that you won't stop after that. That you will still find something wrong.

I think that you could figure out the answers for yourself if you made up your mind, but you give the impression that you are not really searching for answers.

[BibleOnly]

Have you read about cognitive dissonance ? It's a fascinating subject.

Seriously, I am not claiming to question my experience, but why would I be here, if not to find out what the SDA view is ? I've asked a lot of SDAs and not one has offered an explanation for these verses. My conclusion should be that you can all tell I won't believe you anyhow, but yet you still keep talking to me ?