1 Cor 13

[Lysimachus]

Dr. Rich, I'm afraid your words have little credibility in this matter.

[Dr. Rich]

Dr. Rich, I'm afraid your words have little credibility in this matter.

Yes, you are correct, just like the words of Jesus had little credibility with the majority of the Jews. One can lead a horse.............

"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants." Deut. 30:19

What Paul said about the 'gifts of the holy spirit' was totally false! What he said about the church being body of Christ is also totally false!

Choose Christ or Paul--as they are not the same, but are as different as life and death.

[Guest]

Yes, you are correct, just like the words of Jesus had little credibility with the majority of the Jews. One can lead a horse.............

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: BibleOnly

I'm not sure why you want to argue about this still.

Because what is the point in moving on to the next subject if we are not going to come into harmony on round 1? You made it clear that you are here to get your questions answered and inquire about SDA teachings. We cannot move on to the next point until we are agreed on this matter. Otherwise, there is nothing in common. This doctrine of false tongues I take serious offense to, because it is Satanic, and therefore, as long as you hold to this perfidious doctrine, I cannot trust anything else you say.

Quote:

"It is the only way to read it if the Bible is to be in full harmony with itself, otherwise we find contradiction with Acts which mentions only tongues in context of international languages"

It is true that Acts 2 specifically states that some tongues were understood.

ALL tongues are understood by those who speak the language of the tongue being spoken. ALL tongues are not understood to those who do not know the language.

Is this so difficult to comprehend?

Quote:

Yet, you invent things like 'hearing in ears' to explain something you've never experienced.

I have never experienced it because I know that if I were to experience it, it would be that of another power. Not God's power. Satan works even through sincere people to deceive them.

I don't care how "good" it feels. Satan gives people a sensational feeling to make them think it is a work of the Holy Spirit. We cannot go by feelings or emotions or wonderful manifestations of any kind. We must go by principle.

Quote:

As I posted elsewhere, your interpretation falls over the moment you ignore 1 Cor 13, and act as if tongues is not something that is operated in the church today.

1 Corinthians 12-14 in their entirety is what proved to me that the true gift of tongues has to do with languages. For example, there was a girl I knew who believed in speaking in tongues. I began reading chapter 12 and read all the way through 14, in the NIV over the phone. She was speechless because the context was so clear that Paul was not endorsing any of the form of tongues where you speak into the air, edifying no one. It's not so difficult to figure out when you read it in its full context, from chapters 12-14.

Quote:

"We do not find one shred of evidence that the version of tongues being derived in 1 Cor. 14 ever took place at Pentecost"

That's actually not true.

You say it is not true. I disagree. I say it is. You offer no proof that is not true, just mere opinion.

Quote:

But, it is clear that in Acts 2, some tongues were understood.

By those who could understand the language.

Quote:

Yet there's no record of tongues ever being used as a tool for preaching, and lots of evidence from the Bible that it was in general something only God understood, not least from 1 Cor 14, and from Romans.

But that's not what is being said. The word "preaching" or "presenting" does not have to be used for it to be implied. The context that men from every nation under heaven coming together automatically requires an understanding that the gospel is going to be preached to them, and so when communicating the gospel, or the truth, there is going to be confusion. Yet the gift of tongues is what reverses the Tower of Babel, and brings harmony to all so that all may understand one another.

And what is your point about Romans?

Quote:

"Pentecostals believe that this is when the gift of tongues was manifested, at Pentecost, and they run around the Church like mad-men, bopping up and down, all over the floor, flopping on the floor like a fish on dry land, and swinging their arms like maniacs (go to youtube if you want some examples, there are literally thousands of videos on this demonic behavior). "

It's interesting to me that you argue with me by telling me what people other than me do. Yes, this is true. And some people started out as SDA and decided their follower was Jesus reincarnated, until the FBI shot them all. Does that mean that I should assume all SDA's act this way ? I disown those people the same way the SDA disowned the Branch Davidians. Neither the Branch Davidians or the out of control people in mainstream Pentecost can change the Bible by their actions.

But keep in mind that the speaking in Tongues movement among Christians began in the 1830s at the Powerscourt Conference in England. This, of course, was a movement instigated by the Jesuits. And all the tongues speaking we see today in Christian Churches sprouted forth from that pipeline--a pipeline to divert Protestantism away from it's Reformation roots and come back under the wings of the mother Hen, Rome.. The "tongues" that you speak of was never heard of or entertained during the Reformation era, or even in the early centuries of the Church. Rather, it sprung forth from counter-reformation theology. This in itself is a red flag to any form of unintelligible utterances that do not provide syllables and patterns in the language.

It would be irresponsible for you to imagine that your version of tongues has suddenly "got it right". But I would argue that you have been influenced by this false movement of tongues, whether you realize it or not. So while you may differ from them, the thought process still finds its origins in this perfidious system of worship.

Quote:

"The only place that the Pentecostal version of tongues can possibly be extracted from is from 1 Corinthians 14. It cannot be extracted from Acts, when the true Pentecost and outpouring of the Holy Spirit took place. "

That is not true, although it is true that 1 Cor 12-14 gives us the most detailed account of tongues in the church we have. Why does your church not obey these scriptures ? Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19 all show that when people become saved, they speak in tongues. Acts 8 and 19 show that a baptised believer can know they don't have the Holy Spirit. These are things the Bible says that are not consistent with your reading or your beliefs.

"That is not true", "that is not true", "that is not true". Your stubbornness is rotten.

Acts 2, 8, 10, and 19 do NOT say that when people become saved, they speak in tongues. There are countless testimonies throughout the rest of the New Testament where entire congregations were saved as well as individuals, and tongues are never mentioned. The specific instances in these chapters are referring only under the pretext that there were many nations under heaven gathered at these congregations. Acts 2 sets the stage, the pretext for understanding that this is the implication in the rest of the chapters. In Acts 10:46, it states "For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." -- but what is the context? The context shows that there were many gentiles gathered at these congregations. When they spoke in tongues, magnifying God, it means that all these Gentiles began to speak in the languages of others in the congregation that could understand them, and they were magnifying God, and those around them who spoke a different language could understand what was being said.

If it is wrong to use, it is a counterfeit. Like I said, Paul was being gentle with these believers. He ddn't want to come outright and say "this is a counterfeit", because he was gradually leading them away from this heresy, trying to help them see the truth, without stepping on their toes too hard. Ellen White had insight on these things, and she even showed how he did this same thing with the feast keepers. He became all things to all men so that he might win them. But the subtle underlying implication in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is that the tongues Paul was telling them to avoid was a counterfeit.

• 1 Cor 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?

  14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?

  14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

  14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them [is] without signification.

  14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

  14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

Hence we see that there is clearly a counterfeit implied in here. If it does not utter an intelligible sound, it is useless. Paul did not want to offend them, but was more prudent in simply helping them see that this form of tongues was unproductive. Paul's emphasis is that if you are speaking in a foreign language to those around you, it's as though one were speaking in the tongue of a barbarian--meaning, "foreigner".

If we are going to edify the Church, we need interpreters for one another. And if the Spirit of God is working, then they will all understand one another's tongue.

Pentecost is a reversal of what took place at the Tower of Babel when the Lord confounded their languages.

At Pentecost, everyone from every nation understood one another. At the Tower of Babel, nobody understood one another.

Quote:

"Sound scholarship leads us to these conclusions."

No, as I've pointed out 1 Cor 12-14 is specific enough that everyone, those who think tongues are for preaching, those who think tongues have simply ended, and those who think that tongues is a prayer language given to all Christians, all find what they want in these verses, as they cannot read them without superimposing their views.

And you cannot read them without superimposing your views either. But you wish to interpret 1 Corinthians 12-14 along, without the rest of Scriptures.

Quote:

I'm the only one to have the integrity to admit this is true for everyone. You've never responded to this point. Yet, the point is, one reading MUST be true, and it must be the one that is simple, logical and in tandem with the rest of the Bible. 'Paul assumed we knew that every second line he wrote was a lie' is none of these things, and falls over on the simple fact that, if this is all true, it's odd that no Bible verse actually says there's such a thing as 'fake tongues' and the people making this claim don't have what they consider to be 'real tongues' in their church, even though Paul says that the Christian church will have these things operating, until Jesus returns.

1 Corinthians 14:7-12 is very clear that there is a false version of tongues. It may not be fake, but it is false. If no one understands you, and all you are doing is speaking up into the air, and Paul is saying "NO", "don't do it!", then by all means, such a manner of speaking in tongues can only be false.

This is plain. This is simple.

And one more time, when I said I read 1 Corinthians 12-14 all the way through to this one girl over the phone, in the NIV, she had nothing to say at the end becasue the obvious overall context is clear that the tongues Paul was condemning was a false version of tongues. The true gift of tongues is the ability to communicate to others who speak in a foreign language. If everyone under heaven is meeting together who speaks a different language, and the gift of tongues falls on them, then the gift of tongues falls on all believers, enabling them to share their testimonies and their conversion experiences with one another.

Quote:

"I'm not sure why you feel so burdened to try and push tongues, especially when you know very well that one does not have to speak in tongues to be saved."

You're right, in the sense that all we need to do is trust Jesus. You're wrong in the sense that every Christian DOES speak in tongues, for reasons the Bible makes clear.

I never said every Christian speaks in tongues. Why are you accusing me of this?

Quote:

If you think 1 Cor 12 proves otherwise, then you also think James was wrong to say every Christian can ask God for wisdom, and that Paul was wrong to say we're saved by faith, as these verses must also say that faith and wisdom are gifts given only to some Christians. You still need to explain why none of the Christians who speak in tongues, interpret and prophecy are in your church, especially given that Paul is most specific in 1 Cor 14 and says that everyone in the church can prophecy, if they seek to.

Did I deny that every Christian cannot ask for the gift of tongues? Were I evangelizing to the world that speaks many different languages, praying for such a gift would be profitable.

Also, there is no proof that what Paul means by "prophesy" here means to foretell the future. It can also mean to interpret prophecy and preach it. We have many false teachers that do not claim to be prophets, but they are labeled "false prophets", because they are preaching false prophecies. We may pray for certain gifts, but it does not mean such a gift will edify everyone in every situation. If you are in a Church where everyone speaks the same language, and or there are a lot of interpreters, such a gift becomes unnecessary. This is why this gift is at the bottom of the scale.

You can seek any gift, but it doesn't mean God is going to give it to you. And obviously, God expects you to use your head as to whether such a gift is necessary.

Very well put, Lysimachus.

[BibleOnly]

Does that mean you have a view on my response that showed all the ways that Lysimachus is at odds with the Bible ?

[Guest]

I never saw where you did that. All I saw were a bunch of insults. And no scripture to back up any of your claims. But maybe I was on the wrong page.

[BibleOnly]

Then you read his post, which was indeed full of insults :-)

Tongues, plural. Not a some tongue to an unknown god. It's referring to languages.

[Lysimachus]

PART 1

Wow - you just won't drop this, nor will you listen. How interesting...Wow - you just won't drop this, nor will you listen. How interesting...

[Lysimachus]

PART 2

Weird. I can tell when people talk to each other in another language. The reason tongues makes people think someone is drunk, is not the sound, but the fact they speak not to men, but to God. When two people talk back and forth, it's clear they are talking.

[BibleOnly]

PART 1

Originally Posted By: BibleOnly

Wow - you just won't drop this, nor will you listen. How interesting...Wow - you just won't drop this, nor will you listen. How interesting...

I could say the same of you BibleOnly. You will just not drop this, nor will you listen. How interesting. Seriously, can you possibly conceive coming into an SDA forum where we are all unanimous on the understanding of the gift of tongues, and then expect us to "drop it" and "concede" to your showboating of your interpretation of the texts in question? I think not.

[BibleOnly]

PART 2

2. Even if they were speaking to God, these were public prayers, and God meant for the prayers of these men to be heard by the public. When a preacher prays in Church, is he praying only for himself, or for the whole congregation? When anyone is asked to pray in Church, is it expected for him to pray silently so only God can hear him, or is it expected that everyone will be able to hear the prayer he’s sending to God?

So while the prayer may be for God and not for men, it was designed for men to hear. If the man speaks in his own tongue and the gift of tongues is not manifested, let there be an interpreter. But once the Holy Spirit takes over, and everyone understands what is being said, then an interpreter is not needed.

I will say this. You're just contradicting Paul. 1 Cor 14 makes clear that an interpreter is needed, or tongues should not occur on the church. you've used a chain of logic to prove the Bible a lie, which is your usual tactic.

I did not read the rest, I was true to my word. This bit just caught my eye and I was incredulous at your again using your own thoughts to argue with God.

[Lysimachus]

:)