What do you believe on the subject of speaking in tongues? So far I
gather that there are a few viewpoints. A. It only happened once at
pentacost. B. It is a gift that some have some don't. C. It is a sign
of the Holy Spirit. D. It is a sign of the Holy Spirit and it is
required for salvation. Please pick one and tell me why you believe it
to be true, or tell me if you have another view. Please try to focus
on using scripture as a basis for your beliefs, but expirience is also
desired. I am not asking out of need for an answer rather to gather as
many viewpoints as possible. Google's experts' view is also desired,
but I doubt they will answer.

---

Clarification of Question by benjaminpearson-ga on 14 Jan 2005 12:05 PST

Can you guys please try to keep away from argument. The purpose of my
asking this question was not to see people argue their beliefs, but
rather state what they believe and why. I did not mean for anywone to
have to defend what they believe, but I would like for them to support
it in their initial comment, and then if another person believes
otherwise they can state their beliefs. But please do not state
disbeliefs and arguments to other people's choices. I don't think that
it is benificial to argue, rather I would like a person to pick a
stance, and state it. If this cannot be done, I will just cancel the
question.

---

Clarification of Question by benjaminpearson-ga on 19 Jan 2005 21:53 PST

Jack, 
    Thanks for your input. I do agree that arguing for the right
reasons can be benificial like you said. I just kinda like having one
very well thought out response as to what each persons beliefs really
are, rather than trying to prove or disprove. If anyone would like to
counter another persons thoughts I guess that is welcome also. My
purpose was really to find out what people think and why, I think this
has helped. Thanks for the information, and for voicing opinions. If
you or anyone else has something to add it would be much appreciated.
If you agree with someone else on this topic, a simple I agree with
____ would be nice too. Thanks again.
                                                        Ben

Hi Benjaminpearson, It is C. and a bit. The ability to "speak in
tongues" was a miraculous gift of God through his power, the holy
spirit [ a force not an individual] It was given to the 120 disciples
at Pentecost to enable them to spread Jesus' message of the Kingdom [
Matthew 6;9,10]to all other people who did not speak Hebrew/Aramaic.
The gift continued on into the time of Paul and he wrote in First
Corinthians 14; 2-19
..in verse 9, Paul said "In the same way also, unless you through the
tongue utter speech easily understood, how will it be known what is
being spoken".
and verse 11.."If then I do not understand the force of the speech
sound, I shall be a foreigner to the one speaking and the one speaking
will be a foreigner to me.
Further, it was important that when the gift was exercised, that a
translator be present so the remainder of the congregation would
benefit from what was being said.
The gift of "speaking in tongues" although miraculous, was simply a
device to enable any small portion of those attending, who could not
understand the Hebrew/Aramaic language, benefit from the current
teaching. It was not gobbledegook. In verse 19, Paul made it very
clear that it was more important to understand the simple message of
the Kingdom ] Matthew 6.9,10] than ten thousand words spoken in a
tongue [ a foreign language]

I'm no expert in the subject, but I've definately noticed both in
experience and by the text of the bible that there are 2 types of
"tongues".  I do wish that they had different names in the english
language because that would definately ease much confusion and debate
about speaking in tongues.

One type is used in public.  In public there should always be an
interperitation (or atleast those around who understand and gain from
the tongue spoken) and this will be used both to show the glory of God
and to bring a message to the people who hear.

The second type is in private.  This is simply a gift that God gives
to his follower in order to increase their faith and add to their
ability to pray and praise Him.

Here is 1 web site that isn't a phenominal source of info, but it
makes the point clearly:
http://www.redbay.com/ekklesia/sit.htm

Hi Jack, Appreciating your input,and hoping I understand your comment.
But why would God, when dealing with any individual [ in his own way]
have that same individual pray to Him [ God] in any other language
than the one that that person normally uses. The God that invented
languages surely can cope with any prayer in any language. A sincere
prayer would not gain any more importance just by changing its
delivery.
Before the attempted building of the tower, in Babel,  to one persons
glory, Nimrod,[Genesis 10; 8,9] the whole worlds population spoke the
same language [Gen. 11;1 ] God considered that they were getting too
"uppity" and might forget what He had done for them. So he "confused"
their language and scattered them across the world. [ Gen. 11; 4-8 ]
Anyone has the right to surmise things, but a Christian should always
back up his statements with the scriptures.

You are very right that God would never need for us to use any certain
language to praise him.  It is definately a matter of the heart when
it comes to our worshiping God.
However if there is a gift God could give us that would bring our
hearts more into the right place or increase our faith then I don't
believe He would hold that back from us if we are faithful to ask for
it.

As for bible references to a "prayer language" (toungues) as opposed
to a prophecy (toungues) that requires interperatation:
Acts 10:44-47 
"While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon
all those who were listening to the message.
All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because
the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God.
Then Peter answered,
Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized whohave
received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?"

Notice "they were hearing them speaking with tongues AND EXALTING
GOD"... clearly there wasn't an interperatation or a prophecy here,
this is strictly the Gentiles worshiping God in tongues.

Here is a statement by Paul that clearly references a distinction
between speaking in tongues and prophecy:
1 Corinthians 14:2-4
"For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God.
Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening,
encouragement and comfort.
He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies
edifies the church"

Clearly from these 2 passages there is a "tongues" (prayer language)
that is not prophecy.  And from the first passage we see that
"tongues" (prayer language) can be used "exalting God".  The more
common understanding of "tongues" (prophecy) as used at Pentacost is a
separate activity that shouldn't be confused with the first.

From that I hope you can see where my belief comes from and the
evidence in the bible for it.  I have seen both activities (prayer
language and prophecy) done many times and although I'm sure some
people fake it or do the activity completely of their own power
thinking it's God, I am definately convinced that many times it is an
act of God giving these gifts to His followers.

Hi again Jack, The last thing that God wants is for us to argue over
all these very pedantic things. First Corinthians 13;8 ...Love never
fails...and then goes on to say that the gift of tongues will be done
away with. It was when the last of the Apostles died.
The gifts that God gave the Apostles were 1. Speech of wisdom, 2.
Speech of knowledge and faith, 3. Healings, 4, Powerful works, 5,
Prophecying, 6. Discernment of inspired utterances. 7. Tongues, 8.
Interpretation of tongues.
Those having the gifts of the spirit could use them only when the
spirit was operative upon them. A good example is at Acts 21;8-11,
where the prophet Ag'-a-bus gave credit to the holy spirit, God's
active force.
For anyone these days to claim to be able to speak in tongues should
also be able to carry out prophecying and powerful works [ raising the
dead]. The Apostles could do it in their time, but only Jesus will do
it in God's own good time.  [John 5;28]. Anything else is Satan's
doing.

I find the beginning of your comment very humorous...  "The last thing
that God wants is for us to argue..." and then you continue our debate
exactly as we had been doing before.  Just a thought to not try to
take a moral high ground in such a manor.

However I do believe that discussing such issues (so long as the
spirit behind our words is not bitterness, anger, or pride) is not a
bad thing at all.  It gets us thinking about our own beliefs, why we
have them, and about the reasons for other beliefs are out there.

Unfortunately the 1. Speech of wisdom, 2. Speech of knowledge and
faith, 3. Healings, 4. Powerful works, 5. Prophecying, 6. Discernment
of inspired utterances. 7. Tongues, 8. Interpretation of tongues. that
I have witnessed cannot be shown in a mere message...  What evidence
could I possibly bring with typing?  You claim that these all went
away as the spirit left the apostles... "Those having the gifts of the
spirit could use them only when the
spirit was operative upon them."

Do you not know that the spirit is with us still today?  

Acts 1:8
"But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you
will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and
to the ends of the earth.? "
Clearly the Apostles did not reach "the ends of the earth" and so the
holy spirit must still have been working in people until this happend
(or will happen).

Acts 6:5
"This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full
of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor,
Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. "
Isn't this after the time where you claimed that the spirit had departed?

I'll end with 
John 4:12
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I
do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because
I go to the Father."
**"he who believes in Me"... not he who believes in me who happens to
be my apostle in the very short time that my spirit rests on his head

Sorry for the dual comment, but I failed to address 1 Cor 13:8...
which I agree is a key verse.  **but I'll include 1 Cor 9 & 10 as to
not lose the context:

"Love never fails.  But where there are prophecies, they will cease;
where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is
knowledge, it will pass away.
For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection
comes, the imperfect will dissapear."

"BUT WHEN PERFECTION COMES" that is very crucial.  What perfection
could their be but the returning of Christ?  If you read further in
the chapter it also suggests that childlike ways (the ways of the
world... including tongues, prophecying...) will no longer be needed
when Christ returns and we see him face to face.

You are absolutely right that these things will cease... surely what
good would they do us when we are in heaven and can perfectly worship
God without the use of such things.  But here on earth they remain so
that we may better serve/worship God until the time of Jesus' return. 
I think your misunderstanding is simply the timing of their ceasing
which is made clear from the verses following 1 Cor 13:8 (as you
pointed out).

Hi again Jack, I hope we are both aiming for the same thing, to please
God. I think we should have a look at the base reason for God
instigating the use of tongues. To get across to people of other
languages the message that Jesus was preaching. The incoming Kingdom ,
or government, of God, directed by Jesus, where wickedness of every
sort will be done away with. This is prophecied at Psalm 37; 9-11 and
28,29. Evil is still with us so this is still future. Your belief, I
think, is that everybody who dies, goes to heaven and Jesus is still
to arrive. Mine is that only 144,000 go to heaven [ out of all the
billions who have lived and died] and those billions will be
resurrected back to a much more productive earth, and where death will
no longer be experienced. Revelation 7;4 & 14;1, 20;4] [Revelation
21;4].  We have vastly complicated just what Jesus was trying to teach
us, face to face. To love God first, and your neighbour second. As a
seaman with tremendous respect for the sea, even prior to the tsunami,
a book with the scripture at James 5;4 must be the way to guide us
through ...what is to be done away with...the present system of
things. Respectfully, Pug.

Howdy Pug!  We are coming from different perspectives, however I
definately don't believe we're all on our way to heaven.
If you confess with your mouth Jesus is lord and believe in your heart
that God raised Him from the grave, you will be saved.
Romans 10:9
The conditional statement there definately suggests that not all will be saved.

You're absolutely right about the tongues for the benefit of those
nonbelievers.  And I think you're really cought up on the word
"tongues" as many people are.  I tried to be completely clear earlier
that there are 2 types of "tongues" and that they are used differently
and that if the english words in the bible differentiated them then
much confusion could be avoided.

As stated before, the type of tongues you keep referring to is the
kind that will be understood by atleast 1 person who is present.
I gave bible referrences to show there is clearly another type of
"tongues" (although once again the language will confuse things since
they are both called the same thing).  You have given evidence that
tongues exists in the form of which you are familiar with, and I
completely agree that this form is valid as you said.

The 2 points of disagreement are:
1) If tongues ended after Pentacost or if they continue today
2) If tongues can be used to describe a prayer language as well as a prophecy

#1 we both gave evidence for our view and we disagree, and that is
fine... unfortunately we can't agree on everything but we can still
love eachother :)

#2 I have given biblical evidence that this prayer language exists and
that it is called "tongues".  And your arguement against it is that
"tongues" means prophecy and you gave evidence for that.
However, your are arguing language where I am arguing substance.  Here
is the difference:
If I say "Both Westies and German Shephards are dogs", and then you
say "No, that is not correct because Westies are dogs"...  Then I made
a correct statement and your arguement is invalid.

Here with tongues we have a similar issue.  I said that both the
"tongues" of prophecy and the "tongues" of a prayer language are
tongues.  Then you disputed it by saying that "tongues" of prophecy
are tongues.  I gave bible referrences for my belief, and nothing you
have said disputes those verses or my belief...

Do you agree that God could give someone a prayer language (ignoring
the word "tongues") in order to increase their faith and help them to
pray?  If so, we could simply change the word to Huddalisha to clear
things up :)

"I was praying to God and He put words in my mouth that I did not
know, I was praying in huddalisha and I felt so close to God.  I thank
Him for blessing me with this gift that increased my faith and brought
me closer to Him."  If that is within the realm of possibility then
I'd love to come to an agreement here.  If not then I suppose we'll
simply have different beliefs once again and we can agree to disagree
and both know that there is in fact 1 God and 1 truth and perhaps
someday in heaven we can know for sure.

"was simply a device to enable any small portion of those attending,
who could not understand the Hebrew/Aramaic language, benefit from the
current teaching. It was not gobbledegook"

This was always my interepretation of "speaking in tounges."  Where if
you needed to spread the word to someone who only spoke German, and
you did not speak German, then you would miraculously be able to speak
German.
So what is the gibberish that some people shout out in certain
churches, and people claim that it is a miricle of God that they are
speaking in tounges.  People have explained to me previously that
speaking in tounges is not speaking in another language so others
could underestand, but instead it is the actual word of God that our
human ears cannot interepret.  This never made sense to me.  Could you
maybe tell me what you think?

Sorry for somewhat straying from the topic, and not really adding to
the converstation.

Scarrig, you're right on topic since the topic is "Speaking in
Tongues"... it's me and Pug that got distracted :)

This is actually part of what me and Pug were just debating (almost). 
I think your belief of speaking in tongues is almost correct.
"Where if you needed to spread the word to someone who only spoke German, and
you did not speak German, then you would miraculously be able to speak
German."
I have no doubt that God can give someone this ability.  It's also an
important distinction that the first "tongues" was a little different.
 At Pentecost way back in the time of disciples;  there were people of
many different nationalities around... and it seems that God wanted to
demonstrate his power and touch the hearts of those around (perhaps as
well as share a specific message as you had mentioned):

"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak
with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.  Now there were
dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under
heaven.  And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together,
and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his
own language.  And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying, Behold,
are not all these that speak Galilaeans?  And how hear we, every man
in our own language wherein we were born?"
--Acts 2:4-8


Then there are other references in the bible about "tongues" that are
clearly of a different use than the origional one at Pentecost.

"While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon
all those who were listening to the message.  All the circumcised
believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the
Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.  For they were
hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God."
--Acts 10:44-46

In that passage you see "For they were hearing them speaking with
tongues and exalting God".  That seems different than the first
mention of "tongues" as this time it is exalting God rather than
allowing others to understand.

And here is an even more clear passage:

"For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God.
Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening,
encouragement and comfort.  He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself,
but he who prophesies edifies the church"
--1 Corinthians 14:2-4

Clearly here, "...does not speak to men but to God" and... "no one
understands him".  These lines show without a doubt that these
utterences (also called tongues in the passage) are utterences to God
and not to man.

Although it is possible that these people you speak of making a
ruckous in church and drawing attention to themselves with their
utterences might be speaking to God, I doubt it in most cases.  Here
is my reasoning:

"If any man speaketh in a tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most
three, and [that] in turn; and let one interpret: but if there be no
interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to
himself, and to God."
--1 Corinthians 14:27-28

The context here is Paul talking about appropriate use of spiritual
gifts (I highly recomend reading the chapter).  Here he says "but if
there is no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church".  There
is no question here that the gibberish (perhaps tongues) that you
spoke of that is used aloud in church is at best out of place and
inappropriate (and in my oppinion not of God).  However this type of
tongues can be very appropriate and real if God gives this gift in a
more private location.

I hope this helps!  Let me know if you have any other questions about
tongues... I don't know much more than what I've said, but I'll gladly
do more research.

Pug back for the last time. I simply have to agree there with Scarrig.
The use of tongues is God's gift to spread his message to people of
many languages. The actual wording in the scriptures can sometimes be
a bit confusing, but should not detract us from from following Jesus'
example of preaching about God's incoming "Kingdom" described very
well at Psalms 37.
And Jack, I can't agree that there would be two types of tongues. A
loving God surely would not make life any more complicated than it
already is these days, what with wars and crime. Common sense tells me
that the availability of the Bible in hundreds of languages, [all
stressing the "new" covenant installed by Jesus [Luke 10;27] Love God
and Love your neighbour] is sufficient means by which God can be in
contact with us all. Any person on earth can pray in any language and
he/she can be sure that God understands. Two tongues is superfluous.
Respectfully, Pug.

Pug, although your arguement makes human sense, I stated biblical
evidence for my belief that I have never seen refuted.  The language
in the bible makes it very clear that people had a "prayer language"
that is called "tongues".

You have said nothing to refute this except that you don't believe it.
 And frankly if you're going on your own instincts of what you think
God should do rather than what the bible tells you that He does then
you're making your own religion and that is a dangerous thing.

Hi Jack, I can't add to what I have already said on the tongues issue.
But going on Bible principles, I certainly am not doing anything solo.
God is certainly organized and He must have an organization doing
exactly as He wants. For example.
1. Using His name. Isaiah 42;8
2. Sticking to the Bible. Deuteronomy 4;2
3. DIS-belief in a separate soul. Ezekiel 18;20
4. And a desire to let EVERY man have the chance to either get to
really know God or not even bother. Romans 10; 13-15.
I've got lots more. Respectfully, Pug.

Benjamin,

If you read through the comments then you'll notice that 2 different
beliefs were quite well stated and defended.  What you are asking for
has already been done.

Just a thought, feel free to disagree... but, our debating ("arguing"
as you called it) made us state our beliefs more clearly and provide
more evidence for them.  I think this form of debate is very
beneficial to the debators to help us think through our beliefs more
carefully and more fully realize why we believe what we believe.  If
there were no debate here then we would have simply thrown out our
ideas and not backed them up nearly as well.

So I highly suggest reading through our debate and see how we backed
up our ideas and then let that guide you in what points you think we
made well and what points you don't see enough evidence for.