What the Bible Says About SPEAKING IN TONGUES

I am well aware of Brother Cloud's work. I will be helping him soon in it, God willing. He doesn't need you to defend him. You should be spending more time practicing a Christian woman's humility and spreading the Gospel, under the authority of men, and leave the matters of doctrinal purity to men like Reverend Cloud. He would be the first to tell you that.

Good night and God bless, S4T.

spreading the Gospel

If you think that is all there is, you won't get too far with Bro. Cloud. And BTW, he never uses the term Rev. to describe himself.

"Since tongues were given for a sign to the unsaved Jews, how many are riding along to work with you?"

NO. That's YOU'RE interpretation....NOT THE BIBLE'S. I'll stick to what the BIBLE SAYS, thank you very much. You can keep your heretical teachings to yourself.

Your postings reveal you to be a presumptuous, impertinent and insolent woman. A woman who is not of the Spirit, and who should be ignored.

Your postings reveal you to be a presumptuous, impertinent and insolent woman. A woman who is not of the Spirit, and who should be ignored.

Your posting reveal you to be someone who curses and that makes me think you are lying about Bro. Cloud. I can't see him even knowing someone like you. Go back to posting on the non religious threads.

NO. That's YOU'RE interpretation....NOT THE BIBLE'S. I'll stick to what the BIBLE SAYS, thank you very much. You can keep your heretical teachings to yourself.

Ok, here is what the Bible says about it.

1 Corinthians 14:22
Wherefore tongues are for a sign,
not to them that believe,
but to them that believe not: .....

John 2:18
Then answered the Jews and said unto him,
What sign shewest thou unto us,
seeing that thou doest these things?

1 Corinthians 1:22
For the Jews require a sign,

and the Greeks seek after wisdom....

There ya go, pure heresy right from God's Holy Bible.

**It's not some unknown gibberish...**

One....last....time.

1Cor. 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".

I noticed your experts' teachings seem to dodge commenting on that very verse. They are experts in not experiencing the supernatural Holy Ghost infilling, as is shown in several places in Acts, or they would not wrestle scripture to suit their handed down tradition.

Does traveling to a foreign land, and winning converts, a true witness make? Are the LDS missionaries and JWs true witnesses? They are sincere, and usually nice, if you don't try to show them the error of their teachings.

Again, goodnight.

The expert has addressed it.

Pentecostals and Charismatics often teach that there are two types of tongues described in the New Testament: the “public language tongues” of Pentecost and the “private prayer” tongues of 1 Corinthians 14:4 -- “He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.” Some call this distinction “ministry tongues” and “devotional tongues.”

Early Pentecostal leaders understood that biblical tongues were real earthly languages. They even thought they would be able to go to foreign mission fields and witness through miraculous tongues without having to learn the languages. Those who attempted this, though, returned bitterly disappointed!

“Alfred G. Garr and his wife went to the Far East with the conviction that they could preach the gospel in 'the Indian and Chinese languages.’ Lucy Farrow went to Africa and returned after seven months during which she was alleged to have preached to the natives in their own 'Kru language.’ The German pastor and analyst Oskar Pfister reported the case of a Pentecostal... ‘Simon,’ who had planned to go to China using tongues for preaching. Numerous other Pentecostal missionaries went abroad believing they had the miraculous ability to speak in the languages of those to whom they were sent. These Pentecostal claims were well known at the time. S.C. Todd of the Bible Missionary Society investigated eighteen Pentecostals who went to Japan, China, and India ‘expecting to preach to the natives in those countries in their own tongue,’ and found that by their own admission ‘in no single instance have [they] been able to do so.’ As these and other missionaries returned in disappointment and failure, Pentecostals were compelled to rethink their original view of speaking in tongues” (Robert Mapes Anderson, Vision of the Disinherited: The Making of American Pentecostalism).

The conclusion was soon reached that their “tongues” were not earthly languages but a “heavenly” or special prayer language; and those are the terms we have heard frequently at large Charismatic conferences, such as those in New Orleans in 1987, Indianapolis in 1990, and St. Louis in 2000. The tongues that I heard in these conferences were not languages of any sort, but merely repetitious mumblings that anyone could imitate. Larry Lea supposedly spoke in tongues in Indianapolis in 1990, and this is a key example of what is being passed off for tongues in the Charismatic movement. It went something like this: “Bubblyida bubblyida hallelujah bubblyida hallabubbly shallabubblyida kolabubblyida glooooory hallelujah bubblyida.” I wrote that down as he was saying it and later checked it against the tape. Nancy Kellar, a Roman Catholic nun who was on the executive committee of the St. Louis meeting in 2000, spoke in “tongues” on Thursday evening of the conference. Her tongues went like this: “Shananaa leea, shananaa higha, shananaa nanaa, shananaa leea…” repeated over and over and over.

If you think I’m making fun of these people, you are wrong. This is taken directly from the audiotapes of the messages. If these are languages, they certainly have a simple vocabulary! My children had a more complex language than that when they were still toddlers.

Michael Harper says: “In the short history of the Charismatic Renewal speaking in tongues has become rare in public, but continues to be a vital expression of prayer in private (These Wonderful Gifts, 1989, p. 97). He says this type of “tongues” is “a prayer language: a way of communicating more effectively with God” (p. 92). He claims that this experience “edifies” apart from the understanding: “Modern Western man finds it hard to believe that speaking unknown words to God can possibly be edifying. ... All one can say is ‘try it and see’. I can still remember today the moments when I first used this gift, and the immediate awareness I had that I was being edified. This is one of the most important reasons why the gift needs to be used regularly in private prayer” (These Wonderful Gifts, p. 93). Harper says he is mystically aware of being edified even though he does not know what he is saying. He also says this “gift needs to be used regularly” and is therefore something important for the Christian life.

To prove his point he simply invites the skeptical observer to “try it and see,” reminding us that experience is the Charismatic’s greatest authority. (The “come and see” approach creates a new problem, though, for the Bible never says to “try tongues” or to seek after tongues and never describes how one could learn how to speak in tongues. In the Bible, speaking in tongues is always a supernatural activity that is sovereignly given by God.)

Even some that do not claim to be Pentecostals or Charismatics have this experience. Jerry Rankin, head of the International Mission Board (Southern Baptist), says he speaks in a “private prayer language” and contrasts this with the practice of “glossolalia.”

“I do have a private prayer language, have for more than 30 years. I don’t consider myself to have a gift of tongues. I’ve never been led to practice glossolalia, you know, publicly, and I think the spiritual gifts clearly in the didactic passage of the Scriptures are talking about the public uses, edification and gifts in the church. ... I've never viewed personally my intimacy with the Lord and the way His Spirit guides me in my prayer time as being the same as glossolalia and subjected to that criteria. ... I just want God to have freedom to do everything that He wants to do in my life and I’m going to be obedient to that” (“IMB president speaks plainly with state editors about private prayer language,” Baptist Press, Feb. 17, 2006).

It is a wonderful thing to desire to do God’s will wherever that leads, but He will never lead contrary to His own Word in the Scriptures. For the following reasons we are convinced that the Bible does not support the doctrine of a “private prayer language.”

FIRST, PAUL SAID THE TONGUES SPEAKER EDIFIES HIMSELF (1 Cor. 14:4). That would not be possible unless the words could be understood, because throughout the fourteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians Paul says that understanding is necessary for edification. In verse 3 he says that prophesying edifies because it comforts and exhorts men, obviously referring to things that are understood to the hearer. In verse 4 he says that tongues speaking does not edify unless it is interpreted. In verses 16-17 he says that if someone does not understand something he is not edified. Words could not be plainer. If there is no edification of the church without understanding, how is it that the individual believer could be edified without understanding? This is confusion. The word “edify” means to build up in the faith. Webster’s 1828 dictionary defined it as “to instruct and improve the mind in knowledge generally, and particularly in moral and religious knowledge, in faith and holiness.” The words “edify,” “edification,” “edified,” and “edifying” are used in 18 verses in the New Testament and always refer to building up in the faith by means of instruction and godly living. For example, in Ephesians 4 the body of Christ is edified through the ministry of God-given preachers (Eph. 4:11-12).

SECOND, IF THE TONGUES OF 1 CORINTHIANS 14 IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF ACTS 2, THE BIBLE NEVER EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE. We leave “tongues” in the book of Acts (the last mention is in Acts 19:6) and we do not see them again until 1 Corinthians 12-14. If the “tongues” in this epistle is a different type of thing than the “tongues” in Acts, why doesn’t the Bible say so?

THIRD, PAUL SAYS THAT TONGUES ARE AN EARTHLY LANGUAGE (1 Cor. 14:20-22). If tongues were some sort of “private prayer language,” why would Paul give this prophetic explanation of it and state dogmatically that it is an earthly language? He does not say that some types of tongues are languages and others are not.

FOURTH, IN 1 COR. 14:28 PAUL SAYS THE TONGUES SPEAKER SPEAKS BOTH TO HIMSELF AND TO GOD. “But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.” This means that he can understand what he is speaking. Otherwise, how could he speak to himself? Does anyone speak to himself in “unknown gibberish”?

FIFTH, IF THERE WERE A “PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE” THAT EDIFIED THE CHRISTIAN’S LIFE IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT AND THE BIBLE WOULD EXPLAIN IT CLEARLY AND CIRCUMSCRIBE ITS USAGE AS IT DOES THE USE OF TONGUES IN THE CHURCH. Further, a “private prayer language” that helped the Christian to be stronger in his walk with Christ would doubtless be mentioned in other places in the New Testament in the context of sanctification and Christian living. In fact, though, it is never mentioned in such a context. The apostles and prophets addressed many situations in the New Testament epistles and gave all things necessary for holy Christian living, but they never taught that the believer needs to speak in a “private prayer language” in order to have spiritual victory.

SIXTH, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT TONGUES-SPEAKING COULD BE A NECESSARY PART OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE, BECAUSE PAUL PLAINLY STATES THAT NOT ALL SPEAK IN TONGUES (1 Cor. 14:29-20). Some will ask, “Why, then, does Paul say, ‘I would that ye all spake with tongues’” (1 Cor. 14:5)? We answer that Paul was not saying that they all did speak with tongues or that they all could speak with tongues; he was merely expressing a desire that the exercise of spiritual gifts be done and that it be done right. Paul is looking upon tongues when it is interpreted as another form of prophesying and both were effective in edifying the church, and his burden was to see the church edified in every way. He said, “I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.” Note that the apostle exalted prophesying above tongues, but the Charismatic movement focuses on tongues more than prophesying.

SEVENTH, ALL OF THE NEW TESTAMENT’S INSTRUCTION ABOUT PRAYER TAKE FOR GRANTED THAT PRAYER IS A CONSCIOUS, WILLFUL, UNDERSTANDABLE ACT ON THE PART OF THE BELIEVER AND THAT HE IS SPEAKING TO GOD IN UNDERSTANDABLE TERMS. We see this in Jesus’ instructions about prayer. “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen” (Matt. 6:5-13). We also see this in Paul’s instructions about prayer (i.e., Rom. 15:30-32; Eph. 6:18-20; Col. 4:2-3; Heb. 13:18-19). There is not one example of a prayer recorded in Scripture that is anything other than an individual speaking to God in understandable terms. In fact, Christ forbade the repetitious type of “prayers” that are commonly heard among those that practice a “private prayer language.” “But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking” (Mat. 6:7). Yet I have oftentimes heard “prayer tongues” that sound like this: “Shalalama, balalama, shalalama, balalama, bubalama, shalalama, bugalala, shalalama....” Whatever that is, it is not New Testament “tongues” and it is not New Testament prayer.

EIGHTH, EVEN IF WE WERE TO AGREE THAT 1 COR. 14 REFERS TO A “PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE,” IT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LEARNED OR IMITATED. Whatever is described in 1 Corinthians 14 is a divine miracle, but this is contrary to the Pentecostal-Charismatic practice whereby people are taught to speak in a “prayer language.” This brings us to our final point.

NINTH, THE PRACTICE OF LEARNING HOW TO SPEAK IN TONGUES THAT IS POPULAR AMONG PENTECOSTALS AND CHARISMATICS IS UNSCRIPTURAL AND DANGEROUS. If we were to agree that there is such a thing as a “private prayer language” and that it would help us live a better Christian life and if we were to accept the Charismatic’s challenge to “try it and see,” the next question is, “How do I begin to speak in this ‘prayer language’?” A chapter in the book These Wonderful Gifts (by Michael Harper) is entitled “Letting Go and Letting God,” in which the believer is instructed to stop analyzing experiences so carefully and strictly, to stop “setting up alarm systems” and “squatting nervously behind protective walls.” He says the believer should step out from behind his “walls and infallible systems” and just open up to God. That is a necessary but unscriptural and exceedingly dangerous step toward receiving the Charismatic experiences. Having stopped analyzing everything with Scripture, the standard method of experiencing the “gift of tongues” or a “private prayer language” is to open one’s mouth and to start speaking words but not words that one understands and allegedly “God will take control.” Dennis Bennett says: “Open your mouth and show that you believe the Lord has baptized you in the Spirit by beginning to speak. Don’t speak English, or any other language you know, for God can’t guide you to speak in tongues if you are speaking in a language known to you. ... Just like a child learning to talk for the first time, open your mouth and speak out the first syllables and expressions that come to your lips. ... You may begin to speak, but only get out a few halting sounds. That’s wonderful! You’ve broken the ‘sound barrier’! Keep in with those sounds. Offer them to God. Tell Jesus you love Him in those ‘joyful noises’! In a very real sense, any sound you make, offering your tongue to God in simple faith, may be the beginning of speaking in tongues” (The Holy Spirit and You, pp. 76, 77, 79).

This is so grossly unscriptural and nonsensical it would not seem necessary to refute it. There is absolutely nothing like this in the New Testament. To ignore the Bible and to seek something that the Bible never says seek in ways the Bible does not support and to open oneself uncritically to religious experiences like this puts oneself in danger of receiving “another spirit” (2 Cor. 11:4).

OK. Here's what the Bible says about it:

I noticed that YOU decided to skip the first part of Cor. 14. What's the matter. Does it destroy your slanted interpretation of what the WHOLE says about tonues? So I wonder what the beginning part of Cor. 14 says:

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.

3) But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

4) He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

"No, I don't think so; I don't always understand Scripture thoroughly - particularly when it's in vernacular of Elizabethan England (of the KJV). I also know that when ever and where ever three or more Baptists are gathered in His Name, there are liable to be seven or more opinions."

You then, rather than relying on plain, understandable and clear text of the Bible, decide to RE-ENTERPRET these simple, understandable passages to mean something YOU want it to say. That is called BLASPHEMY!! Go to the end of the Book of Revelation, and read the warning that the ASCENDED JESUS warns to those who add or detract from Holy Scripture, and then rethink your interpretation. Your eternal rewards will depend on it.

Interesting.
... but all the same it is disjointed and includes declarative statements by the author without biblical reference, and which cannot in fact be backed biblically.

Additionally - statements made by the author about the target audience of Paul in different letters (Jews vs. Gentiles) are in my opinion clearly incorrect as indicated by Paul himself.

The Bible says quite plainly that God knows the hearts of men. If a man is truly seeking God through Christ then God will know that - but in the end the judgment is between that man and God himself.

If one chooses to worship standing and another sitting, if one chooses to worship quietly and another chooses to sing out loud - who is any man made of flesh to judge which is more correct?

There is a big difference but a very fine line between honest friendly and informative discussions about doctrine man-made divisions within the Body.

Seeking out arguments within the Church is folly, and is in most cases a waste of effort. The Bible also speaks quite plainly on the issue of division within the church. I have no issue with a brother telling me he disagrees or even going so far as to say that he believes me to be wrong - but that is an entirely different animal than that brother telling me that I am so wrong that I am worshiping false gods and therefore am not a Christian at all.

Unless someone is preaching that tongues are somehow a REQUIRED element for salvation then I believe that it falls within the realm of doctrinal choice and personal relationship. That said - anyone anywhere preaching that anything is required for salvation above and beyond that which Christ himself required is a foolish man indeed.

By simple definition there can be no perfect man-made organization, and that includes churches.

John 13:35: By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another
Romans 12:10: Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
Ephesians 4:2: With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;

That's my 2 cents - take it at full value, unadjusted for inflation...

OK, let's try this again; ACTS 2:4 says, And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

I am relying on plain, understandable and clear text of the Bible (and) I am NOT RE-ENTERPRET(ing) anything nor is it BLASPHEMY because I refuse to engage in glossilalia!! Any time the Holy Spirit needs, wants, or desires me to speak and understand another language, I'm open to the urging of the Spirit but I will not to speak gibberish!

I've also read through the Book of Revelation and my eternal reward does not depend on Speaking in Tongues; it depends on my Acceptance of and Belief in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. This comes directly from Jesus who said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).

If you want to try telling someone that they must speak in tongues to get into heaven, try telling that to someone else - my eternal reward is given and guaranteed by my Master who said, "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine (John 10:14)." My Salvation is not and never was dependent on Speaking in Tongues!

As Ronald Reagan said many times: "There you go again."

Your problem is reading into any of my posts, anything you want to read into it. Rewards are not equal to "Salvation" because "Salvation" is a Gift Of God, it cannot be earned, but rewards are those things you did in the flesh that earned you rewards in heaven.

You still haven't explained what the Bible means when in 1 Cor 14:2 it states: For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; (To you, it means speaking gibberish because "NO MAN UNDERSTANDETH HIM". The Bible calls it speaking in an UNKNOWN LANGUAGE.

Nuff said. You keep believing that you can pervert the work of God to suit your particular viewpoint. I will choose to turn MY viewpoint off and resort to the Holy word of Scripture instead.

**Early Pentecostal leaders understood that biblical tongues were real earthly languages.**

Paul was an early Pentecostal leader. Pentecostal, in that he received the same Holy Ghost as was poured out on Pentecost. He wrote 1Cor. 14:2 "..no man understandeth..".

I agree with your experts disdain for those that teach people to speak in tongues. It isn't taught, it just happens as one is worshipping the Lord in spirit and in truth. But, it must be subject to the one speaking, as Paul made clear in 1Cor. 14.

Yes, I've been around some that have developed a routine tongue, something that is very repetitive. If a pastor feels led to, he will talk to that person, and remind them that it has to be God and not us. And deceivers (whether they know they are or not) are foretold of in scriptures. But, most pastors just let the wheat grow with the tares, and let the Judge handle it.

My viewpoint stands.

I think the Holy Spirit did allow Speaking in Tongues to provide 'proof' to those who heard and understood. I do not speak another language but I do recognize several when I hear them. My wife is Thai and sometimes prays quietly to herself in her own language. Few other people have ever heard her. I don't understand my wife's native language but I do recognize it. I can recognize when someone prays in Spanish, or Chinese, or Korean, or Phillipino, or even Russian (all ethnic groups that do now or have in the past attended churches I've attended) but I don't recognize the speech of those who pray in an Unknown Tongue.

I don't know how to say this any more plainly and yet remain polite - I don't Speak in Tongues and I won't Speak in Tongues until the Holy Spirit makes it clear to me that I must. I believe in God the Father, and in Jesus the Son and Savior, and in the Holy Spirit - the Comforter who came after Jesus ascended; I don't require a 'proof' from speaking a language that neither I nor anyone else present (with the possible exception of the Holy Spirit) can understand. I see no 'reward' in doing so - I recommend we, as they say, agree to disagree because it appears I cannot convince you (and you certainly will not convince me). I do wish you well and hope you find comfort (and rewards when you reach heaven).

Folks here bashing it might ought to go see out a real serious Pentecost church first.

just my take...very few of them are dead assemblies

Amen.

I don't think there's any worse stink than a dead Pentecostal church. And nothing better than a wisely led, balanced, humble, kind, warm, servant-hearted one.

I have also observed that speaking in tongues is an enormously humbling phenomena. And, typically, those with the most pride seem most reluctant or resistant to such gifting even within the Pentecostal/Charismatic circles.

It also seems to me that satan attacks those most who are closest to hearing and following the Lord--both attacking from within each individual and from without.

I wonder how Holy Spirit is going to be able to lead any individual into all truth, if that individual is resistent to hearing Holy Spirit's still small voice. He's not usually given to forcing Himself on anyone.

I think black Southern Baptist services have similar liveliness. And I love it, too.

Though in both groups, sometimes folks seem to try to wind up Holy Spirit by putting on a primarily fleshy, formula type show. That's not very attractive, at all.

Hey Quix, welcome back.

THANKS TONS.

Great to be back "home."

How are you and your family? Feel free to give me an update privately, if you wish. Have missed you, too.