Replies

"Speaking in tongues is NOT needed TODAY! Yes, when the Holy Spirit came people spoke in tongues - this was PRIOR to the WRITTEN WORD.
"

It isn't? How do you know this? Actually, Paul's words were written, so this was not prior to the written word. Are Paul's letters no longer relevant? That would come as an enormous suprise to all those denominations that focus primarily on Paul's letters.

Are you authoritative enough to tell other what is and is not needed in worship? That's pretty bold, it seems to me.

Paul instructed the young churches in doctrine, and most churches use his words today to help them understand what to do. Are you saying that Paul's words are no longer of value to today's church?

It's all academic to me, of course.

"Tongues of Men and Angels" by William J. Samarin, an anthropolgist, written from a linguistic approach, suggested reading.

The late Father Vincent P. Micelli, S.J., in the appendix to his book "The Antichrist" (©1981), p. 279, quotes from Rousas John Rushdoony in "Power From Below," reproduced by Gary North in his book, "None Dare Call It Witchcraft, pp. 222-224:

"It (power from below) also means a greater stress on mindless religion, as witness the so-called charismatic movement, an emphasis on mindless experience as power. The charismatic who learns to babble insanely in what is no tongue at all has no answer therein to moral and intellectual problems, but he "witnesses" eloquently to others of the feeling of "power in the Spirit," power which is in essence a cultivation of what is mindless and subterranean . . . ."

Interestingly, in the appendix, Fr. Micelli quotes from some non-Catholic sources, including Dostoevsky, Solzhenitsyn, and others, also Catholic sources.

Interesting read for Catholics and non-Catholics alike. One post described what I could only regard as power coming up from below rather than from above.

"It isn't? How do you know this? Actually, Paul's words were written, so this was not prior to the written word. Are Paul's letters no longer relevant? That would come as an enormous suprise to all those denominations that focus primarily on Paul's letters. "

So the Bible was written in Paul's day? Just because Paul wrote a lot of things yet only SOME of it is in the Bible. Interesting how God is SELECTIVE. You need ALL that is in the Bible to get the most accurate picture. Then again, for some who have little interest in His teachings would be content with some crumbs to bat around.

"Are you authoritative enough to tell other what is and is not needed in worship? That's pretty bold, it seems to me."

You really need to READ the Bible. The BIBLE, God's Word is the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY. That's where I get my views from. I think God has every right to be BOLD. I believe God has every right to determine HOW people worship and WHO they worship. If people could move off their agendas and READ what He has written for us, they'd flee some of these "churches" but they'd rather trust a mere mortal to teach them unBiblical teachings to fit in with their pride/ego and agenda.

"Paul instructed the young churches in doctrine, and most churches use his words today to help them understand what to do. Are you saying that Paul's words are no longer of value to today's church? "

I'm saying over and over again that speaking in tongues is not necessary today. We have the Bible.

What you keep avoiding over and over and over again is WHY you think tongues are necessary today when we have His WRITTEN Word for teachings, doctrines, beliefs etc..

Do you think God is stupid? Did He leave things out that must be spoken in tongues that most will NOT understand?

The God I know, is Perfect. He doesn't over look anything. I suppose I'll never get the answer to my question on WHY you believe speaking in tongues is legitimate. BTW, HOW do you know speaking in tongues is from GOD? HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS, let alone WHAT they are saying when they "speak in tongues"? Me thinks you have a lot of explaining to do.

"It's all academic to me, of course."