speaking in tongues = communicating the full spectrum of wavelengths of life...symbolism and archetypical pattern recognition in dialogue...enables inter-religious realizations like on pentecost.
as if to say "oh, i recognize all myths and histories in the forms and shapes that the words (of men) are merely pointing to."
The 12 Apostles' "Great Commission" given them by Christ was to go, preach the Kingdom of Heaven. Their goal was for Israel to repent and accept that Jesus truly was the Messiah. If Israel had repented, there would have been no "age of grace" that we live in now. It was God's goal for Israel, under Christ to be the conduit for God's blessings on earth to the Gentiles.
In order to spread this gospel, they needed to be able to tell folks in the people's own tongues.
That's why I believe the miracle was that they spoke in languages other people understood. The Apostles were able to use this "gift" of the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Kingdom that was coming to all people in all languages.
Sadly, Israel did not repent, as Peter commanded, and over a span of time rejected their Messiah.
The Kingdom of Heaven is in "abayance" (doncha love those old TWI terms? - not!) now.
Thus, tongues is no longer needed.
I think that what we did in TWI was not biblical speaking in tongues.
Theologically one has to look only to the present dispensation of the Secret and see that God knew that this time slot would exists. Further, the promises of Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures take two (2) main streams; (a) the suffering Messiah and (b) the returning King. While Jews at the time of Christ had a very difficult time wrapping their heads around his impending death (just read the numerous times in the Gospel records where Jesus tried to convey this to his disciples and they brushed it off). This is a huge subject, but one understood by most theological institutions. In Palestine, at that time, the looked for Messiah was one who would knock around the Romans (read: Gentiles) and give the Jews back their land. The other Messiah was not that pretty a picture.
The chronology of Daniel 9 had a last seven (7) years prophesied (of really bad luck, IMHO, Jesus called it a time of great tribulation) and these would have had to work out regardless. Speaking in tongues was not just for new converts (i.e. - to all people in all languages) it was just as viable for what Paul wrote about in his Corinthian epistles. This tongues is no longer needed is Reformed and Classical Dispensationalist theological poppycock. That which is perfect is not yet come (a oblique reference IMHO to the heavenly Jerusalem that the Hebrew prophets, Jesus and Paul referenced (the well-founded city, designed and built by God). It comes to (a new) earth a while from now.
That still doesn't address the question of whether or not what we, in The Way, as well as other "charismatic" organizations, called "speaking in tongues" is even remotely similar to what was going on in the first century.
have you read about Joseph who dream in tongues and interpreted the dream
Gen 41:12 And there was there with us a young man, an Hebrew, servant to the captain of the guard; and we told him, and he interpreted to us our dreams; to each man according to his dream he did interpret
Well, I speak in tongues and did so before twi although that is not an issue with me. Speaking in tongues is a major factor in my daily prayer life.
My mother said she spoke in tongues very early in her life. Younger sister and I discussed some years ago how we spoke in tongues when we were children but did so privately. We thought we were special and had a secret. We were and we did.
Dreams are underrated. Sometimes that is the only time Father can get anything through to me because I am too gang busters to listen when I am awake.
Here's where credibility comes back into the picture.
Wierwille taught that God talked to people in the OT through dreams because they didn't have spirit IN them, like modern day "believers", by which to receive revelation. Hence, he said, God would only talk to us in dreams if we were so far out of fellowship that He could not reach us by revelation. Furthermore, VPW taught that dreams can otherwise be the result of devil spirits trying to get into our minds through "the trap door".
Do I still believe that explanation?
No, I do not.
But, here's the thing.
If Wierwille was wrong about dreams, what makes you think he was right about tongues?
That still doesn't address the question of whether or not what we, in The Way, as well as other "charismatic" organizations, called "speaking in tongues" is even remotely similar to what was going on in the first century.
I didn’t realize this was the only thing we could comment on in this thread. It started out without this perspective. There is no way to determine whether what we called speaking in tongue is what it was in the first century. Empirical data cannot tell us. Faking is rampant; just think of what goes on in the bedroom. The experience of people the world over tells us that it is real. I have personally been in a meeting where a gentleman stood up, spoke in tongues and interpreted. He spoke in Hebrew and interpreted in English. I rushed to him and checked his background, asked him where he had “learned” it; found out he was a simple believer who became incensed by my questions until I told him I understood the words he was speaking before he interpreted. I was pretty much blown away because I don’t understand modern Hebrew, but Biblical. This happened over 30 years ago.
Theologically, as I believe I’ve shown a bit of above, the manifestation didn’t disappear. I’ve had as many knock down/ drag outs about that as I have with professors over the existence of a Trinity.
Here's where credibility comes back into the picture.
Wierwille taught that God talked to people in the OT through dreams because they didn't have spirit IN them, like modern day "believers", by which to receive revelation. Hence, he said, God would only talk to us in dreams if we were so far out of fellowship that He could not reach us by revelation. Furthermore, VPW taught that dreams can otherwise be the result of devil spirits trying to get into our minds through "the trap door".
Do I still believe that explanation?
No, I do not.
But, here's the thing.
If Wierwille was wrong about dreams, what makes you think he was right about tongues?
Absolutely, VP was horseapples about dreams. He never gave any real reasons for their disappearance. The “spirit on” versus “spirit in” explanation is not sufficienct if the so-called revelation and impartation manifestations were in use during the “spirit on” period, as it is quite obvious they were.
BTW, it wasn’t VP who initially wrote about speaking in tongues and I could care less whether “he was right about” them. It’s pretty obvious that they were around in the first century and history points to revivals/renewals of the use of all the manifestations throughout history. I personally think (can’t prove it…) that the Salem witch trials were about the use of SIT there. The women in the early church in New England were wild and a bit crazy (in a good way).
I, like others who have posted on this thread, spoke in tongues a long time before TWI. Thankfully VP was nowhere around to have "taught" me.
Here's where credibility comes back into the picture.
Wierwille taught that God talked to people in the OT through dreams because they didn't have spirit IN them, like modern day "believers", by which to receive revelation. Hence, he said, God would only talk to us in dreams if we were so far out of fellowship that He could not reach us by revelation. Furthermore, VPW taught that dreams can otherwise be the result of devil spirits trying to get into our minds through "the trap door".
Do I still believe that explanation?
No, I do not.
But, here's the thing.
If Wierwille was wrong about dreams, what makes you think he was right about tongues?
I always thought "dreams" were a form of revelation, much like "visions", the difference being a wakeful state. While I don't have a set of nailed down rules, its clear that God is capable of, and has used both. Either that, or reading the bible is a worthless chore. To me the "naming" of it is sort of a moot point, as my attitude is that God gives you what he wants to give you, but according to what you're asking about, have asked about.
Interestingly then, it wouldn't matter (from my point of view), if you called this a dream or tongues (or a rubber chicken). If God gives it to you, you have to figure out if you want to ignore that or do somethihng with it, and if you ignore it,... well then "who cares!" and that's pretty much the end of that particular activity. It ain't gonna go any further.
As to the speaking in tongues thing. I think it's genuinely given by God. When I started doing it I hadn't heard of the Way,and a lot of people do this outside of the Way. And while there are a lot of religions that disagree on the nitty-gritty, nuts and bolts of it, a lot of people that ask God for this manage to speak in tongues. Even people that attend no church have spoken in tongues. There's also the bit about them being deluded that comes to mind, but by the time people get to that bridge and start lumping people into that category (of delusional people).
As with any human endeavour, I'm sure the tongues people have their share of delusional people, but they seem to be a minority. Can the Devil send a devil spirit off to posess someone and make them speak a language they never learned? Sure, why not. But those instances don't invalidate God or his spirit working in conjunction with a person. But the result, the fruit, is how we know. I mean, does it do that individual any good? I don't mean the intrinsic, speculative kind that can't really be weighed on the scales of life. I mean some tangible, positive result. If, all it does, is sucks time and energy and possible hard earned finances out of their lives for no return, I have to question their priorities.
It's also amazing how people will allow that "sheepy" feeling to overwhelm them, and look for a Shepard. We all do this. I do. You do. At least on occasion. We look for role models, examples, etc. in life and when they fall we love to critique them. You see it everywhere in the news - sports stars, celebrities, politicians and on and on it goes. So it's Human nature that "once burned" it's ALL wrong, whatever IT was. And we're quick criticize IT. ...even the parts of IT that did have some value. I mean, we weren't sucked into IT because it had no appeal, or no value.
A wonderful Dinner with very small amounts of poison is deadly, or can make you real sick. Who wants a fork?
I always thought "dreams" were a form of revelation, much like "visions", the difference being a wakeful state. While I don't have a set of nailed down rules, its clear that God is capable of, and has used both. Either that, or reading the bible is a worthless chore. To me the "naming" of it is sort of a moot point, as my attitude is that God gives you what he wants to give you, but according to what you're asking about, have asked about.
Interestingly then, it wouldn't matter (from my point of view), if you called this a dream or tongues (or a rubber chicken). If God gives it to you, you have to figure out if you want to ignore that or do somethihng with it, and if you ignore it,... well then "who cares!" and that's pretty much the end of that particular activity. It ain't gonna go any further.
As to the speaking in tongues thing. I think it's genuinely given by God. When I started doing it I hadn't heard of the Way,and a lot of people do this outside of the Way. And while there are a lot of religions that disagree on the nitty-gritty, nuts and bolts of it, a lot of people that ask God for this manage to speak in tongues. Even people that attend no church have spoken in tongues. There's also the bit about them being deluded that comes to mind, but by the time people get to that bridge and start lumping people into that category (of delusional people).
As with any human endeavour, I'm sure the tongues people have their share of delusional people, but they seem to be a minority. Can the Devil send a devil spirit off to posess someone and make them speak a language they never learned? Sure, why not. But those instances don't invalidate God or his spirit working in conjunction with a person. But the result, the fruit, is how we know. I mean, does it do that individual any good? I don't mean the intrinsic, speculative kind that can't really be weighed on the scales of life. I mean some tangible, positive result. If, all it does, is sucks time and energy and possible hard earned finances out of their lives for no return, I have to question their priorities.
It's also amazing how people will allow that "sheepy" feeling to overwhelm them, and look for a Shepard. We all do this. I do. You do. At least on occasion. We look for role models, examples, etc. in life and when they fall we love to critique them. You see it everywhere in the news - sports stars, celebrities, politicians and on and on it goes. So it's Human nature that "once burned" it's ALL wrong, whatever IT was. And we're quick criticize IT. ...even the parts of IT that did have some value. I mean, we weren't sucked into IT because it had no appeal, or no value.
A wonderful Dinner with very small amounts of poison is deadly, or can make you real sick. Who wants a fork?
Nicely said Gen,
I like how Zechariah responded to the amazing things that God/the angel was showing him (who cares how…). Zech. 1:9; 4:4, 11; 6:4; 13:6
Then there’s John the Revelator… Rev. 7:13.
They were comfortable enough with that which was revealed and/or given to simply ask…
Well, Mr. RobertErasmus, from my study, I do not believe tongues today is what it was then. You can call my opinion "poppycock" all you want, but you have just lowered yourself to me. If you can't speak and have intelligent discussion here on doctrinal without insults, so be it. I'll just skip over your "poppycock" posts in the future.
For others: The Disciples were commanded by Jesus to spread the news of the coming Kingdom to the world. Thus, they believed he was coming back shortly, as evidenced by their asking him in his resurrection body, will you restore the Kingdom now? i.e., ok, is it coming now?
He sent them out - their "Great Commission". In order to witness to the world in a short time (because they believed the Kingdom was coming shortly, and it would have if Israel had repented and believed as Peter instructed - it was literally "at hand"), they needed to be able to speak other peoples' languages - which they did at pentecost and during the Book of Acts. I believe the manifestation of interpretation was when they were preaching to people via tongues, in their language, and there were others standing near who didn't understand, thus, interpretation was needed. For example, me and my friends speak english. One of my friends is speaking to a group that doesn't speak english via tongues, that non-english group understands and is getting blessed, but me and my english speaking friends have no clue what's being said - thus, someone needs to interpret.
We live in an age of grace that was not prophesied about or spoken of in the OT. We as believers are not called to the earthly Kingdom that is to come, nor to the City - the Heavenly Jerusalem that will descend from heaven to earth. We are called, in the age of grace, to live in the "heavenlies."
I believe tongues - as it was practiced in Acts - is not the same as what we were taught by VP. We are not commissioned to preach the coming kingdom as it is now held in abayance since Israel rejected their Messiah.
I also believe the Holy Spirit has a different "function" in this administration than the last and the one to come.
Well, Mr. RobertErasmus, from my study, I do not believe tongues today is what it was then. You can call my opinion "poppycock" all you want, but you have just lowered yourself to me. If you can't speak and have intelligent discussion here on doctrinal without insults, so be it. I'll just skip over your "poppycock" posts in the future.
For others: The Disciples were commanded by Jesus to spread the news of the coming Kingdom to the world. Thus, they believed he was coming back shortly, as evidenced by their asking him in his resurrection body, will you restore the Kingdom now? i.e., ok, is it coming now?
He sent them out - their "Great Commission". In order to witness to the world in a short time (because they believed the Kingdom was coming shortly, and it would have if Israel had repented and believed as Peter instructed - it was literally "at hand"), they needed to be able to speak other peoples' languages - which they did at pentecost and during the Book of Acts. I believe the manifestation of interpretation was when they were preaching to people via tongues, in their language, and there were others standing near who didn't understand, thus, interpretation was needed. For example, me and my friends speak english. One of my friends is speaking to a group that doesn't speak english via tongues, that non-english group understands and is getting blessed, but me and my english speaking friends have no clue what's being said - thus, someone needs to interpret.
We live in an age of grace that was not prophesied about or spoken of in the OT. We as believers are not called to the earthly Kingdom that is to come, nor to the City - the Heavenly Jerusalem that will descend from heaven to earth. We are called, in the age of grace, to live in the "heavenlies."
I believe tongues - as it was practiced in Acts - is not the same as what we were taught by VP. We are not commissioned to preach the coming kingdom as it is now held in abayance since Israel rejected their Messiah.
I also believe the Holy Spirit has a different "function" in this administration than the last and the one to come.
Just my "poppycock."
Sunesis,
First let me say that I was not impugning your theology, but the theology of millenia past (Reformed and Classical Dispensationalism) that teach the “manifestation of the spirit” are no longer “necessary” or “around” after Acts. Further, I couldn’t care less what Wierwille taught about the “manifestation of the spirit” and would much rather have an intelligent discussion with you or others on Scripture.
I apologize for giving you the impression that it was your personal poppycock. I will refrain from such personalization in the future. Really, I meant to discuss the actual texts themselves.
Please forgive me.
RE
PS - I dont' have the time at this present moment to reply to your post (above) in detail, but if you'll give me the opportunity to do so I will.
Jesus defends a man who has been convicted of stealing bread. The verdict is reversed. The man goes free, and the people supply the needs of his starving family.
1. A Multitude of people thronged the streets. The officers were on the way to court with one, a man accused of stealing bread.
2. And in a little while the man was brought before the judge to answer to the charge.
3. And Jesus and the twelve were there. The man showed in his face and hands the hard drawn lines of toil and want.
4. A woman richly clad, the accuser of the man, stood forth and said, I caught this man myself: I know him well, for yesterday he came to beg for bread.
5. And when I drove him from my door, he should have known that I would harbour not a man like him; and then to-day he came and took the bread.
6. He is a thief and I demand that he be sent to jail.
7. The servants also testified against the man; he was adjudged a thief, and officers were leading him away.
8. But Jesus standing forth exclaimed, You officers and judge, be not in haste to lead this man away.
9. Is this a land of justice and of right? can you accuse and sentence men to punishment for any crime until they testify themselves?
10. The Roman law will not permit such travesty on right, and I demand that you permit this man to speak.
11. And then the judge recalled the man and said, If you have any tale to tell, say on. 12 In tears the man stood forth and said, I have a wife and little ones and they are perishing for bread, and I have told my story oft, and begged for bread; but none would hear.
13. This morning when I left our cheerless hut in search of work my children cried for bread, and I resolved to feed them or to die.
14. I took the bread, and I appeal to God, Was it a crime?
15. This woman snatched the loaf away and threw it to the dogs, and called the officers and I am here.
16. Good people, do with me whate'er you will, but save my wife and little ones from death.
17. Then Jesus said, Who is the culprit in this case?
18. I charge this woman as a felon in the sight of God.
19. I charge this judge as criminal before the bar of human rights.
20. I charge these servants and these officers as parties to the crime.
21. I charge the people of Capernaum with cruelty and theft, because they heeded not the cries of poverty and want, and have withheld from helpless ones that which is theirs by every law of right;
22. And I appeal unto these people here, and ask, Are not my charges based on righteousness and truth?
23. And every man said, Yes.
24. The accused woman blushed for shame; the judge shrank back in fear; the officers threw off the shackles from the man and ran away.
25. Then Jesus said, Give this man what he needs and let him go and feed his wife and little ones.
26. The people gave abundantly; the man went on his way.
27. And Jesus said, There is no standard law to judge of crime. The facts must all be stated e'er a judgment can be rendered in a case.
28. You men with hearts; go forth and stand where stood this man and answer me, What would you do?
29. The thief thinks every other man a thief and judges him accordingly.
30. The man who judges harshly is the man whose heart is full of crime.
31. The courtesan who keeps her wickedness concealed by what she calls respectability, has not a word of pity for the honest courtesan who claims to be just what she is.
32. I tell you, men, if you would censure not till you are free from sin, the world would soon forget the meaning of the word, accused.
That still doesn't address the question of whether or not what we, in The Way, as well as other "charismatic" organizations, called "speaking in tongues" is even remotely similar to what was going on in the first century.
I have yet to see anything beneficial to anyone happen because of someone's babbling of an unknown language to everyone present...
Of course I have no doubt that those who babble really think something "miraculous" is taking place.. It'd be nice if you did something helpful for a change.. Cut out that babbling and use the time to actually help someone with your actual physical body instead of trying to meditate on moving those invisible forces that just don't seem to be moving anyways.. I'm sure the invisible God can easily take of those invisible forces without your babbling about em, else you have a very underpowered God..
I always thought "dreams" were a form of revelation, much like "visions", the difference being a wakeful state.
I agree. Dreams can be prophetic, but they can also be wrong. Sometimes, as Solomon Burke has soulfully reminded us, a dream is "only a dream."
WRT to SIT...my ignorant and uneducated reading of the Book of Acts tells me that the apostles spoke various established languages during Pentecost, not uninterpretable or unintelligible utterances.
(Note that I did not say that there was no spiritual or psychological benefit to speaking uninterpretable or unintelligible utterances. I think there can be when done correctly.)
While I don't have a set of nailed down rules, its clear that God is capable of, and has used both. Either that, or reading the bible is a worthless chore.
After several months of reading the bible sometimes I ask that question myself. However, I continue because I do enjoy reading the bible for the sheer enjoyment, and I intend to finish it from cover to cover.
I have to say, too, that the experience has been pretty exciting. I had no formal ties to any church, religion, or faith other than my standard Catholic upbringing. That means that I have nobody standing over my shoulder telling me what this and that is supposed to mean. While I did initially approach the whole bible study thing with a "Way mentality" (having been introduced to the bible by my ex-Way friend), I've since broken free of it and so I'm on my own.
But there is incredible freedom in making my own private interpretations. Also, the internet and computerized bible study tools have made it so easy to look up various translations and interpretations instantly. It's actually fun. (My God, who knew that I'd ever be reading the bible and saying it's fun?)
No problem RobertErasmus. I do very much enjoy your sharings. But I do like the doctrinal section here and don't want anyone to be intimidated to say what they think. Of course there are going to be disagreements. The doctrinal section here to me is simply the Body of Christ talking among itself. And its lovely. Its also something we never could have done in TWI because we were all in lockstep to VPs doctrine.
I find it very interesting where people's spiritual quests have taken them after TWI and how their view of the Bible has evolved. I think God works with us in different ways. Yes, I know exactly what my view of the Bible is called and trust me, I didn't arrive there overnight, it was more like decades - but I see it in everything I read in the Bible - to me - it is obvious. To others - something else is obvious.
As I said, we are the Body of Christ talking among ourselves, and I love it.
No problem RobertErasmus. I do very much enjoy your sharings. But I do like the doctrinal section here and don't want anyone to be intimidated to say what they think. Of course there are going to be disagreements. The doctrinal section here to me is simply the Body of Christ talking among itself. And its lovely. Its also something we never could have done in TWI because we were all in lockstep to VPs doctrine.
I find it very interesting where people's spiritual quests have taken them after TWI and how their view of the Bible has evolved. I think God works with us in different ways. Yes, I know exactly what my view of the Bible is called and trust me, I didn't arrive there overnight, it was more like decades - but I see it in everything I read in the Bible - to me - it is obvious. To others - something else is obvious.
As I said, we are the Body of Christ talking among ourselves, and I love it.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
17
33
19
Popular Days
Aug 28
22
Aug 26
19
Feb 15
17
Sep 1
12
Top Posters In This Topic
waysider 19 posts
cman 17 posts
anotherDan 33 posts
TRIUNE_GOD 19 posts
Popular Days
Aug 28 2007
22 posts
Aug 26 2007
19 posts
Feb 15 2010
17 posts
Sep 1 2007
12 posts
Popular Posts
Sunesis
No problem RobertErasmus. I do very much enjoy your sharings. But I do like the doctrinal section here and don't want anyone to be intimidated to say what they think. Of course there are going to b
Sunesis
Well, Mr. RobertErasmus, from my study, I do not believe tongues today is what it was then. You can call my opinion "poppycock" all you want, but you have just lowered yourself to me. If you can't s
sirguessalot
i can suggest starting with a mutual consent based-process for any adult discussion ...including doctrinal.. rather ordinary...and any good marriage or friendship is based on it illustrated by ask
Posted Images
cman
Funny, not much said about the tongues of the spirit in our own language.
A miracle as Sunesis pointed out.
Edifying, divine secrets, wonderful works of God.
That would surely be there......fruit too you'd think....
But pointing it out and dissecting it is a waste of effort.
Like trying to catch the wind that blows where it wills.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
hi everybody
tongues of the spirit is showed by speaking in tongues
but that the way one can witness the glory on speaking in tongues
the heat that one body lets into the room or etc
seeing yourself as part of the very heat
traveling on it to the sun and etc
the light that reflecting off your body
you see this subject is bigger than any image you can draw
did Judas really betray Christ or was it plan
was Judas put to death by the others
if Judas plan Christ being took does that change anything
that would mean Christ was aware of everything
maybe just Judas and Christ was aware of everything that was about to happen
think of Judas in a whole new light
thanks
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
the fire is near
i like that Roy
Edited by cman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God
thanks cman
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
speaking in tongues = communicating the full spectrum of wavelengths of life...symbolism and archetypical pattern recognition in dialogue...enables inter-religious realizations like on pentecost.
as if to say "oh, i recognize all myths and histories in the forms and shapes that the words (of men) are merely pointing to."
so yes...i suppose i speak in tongues
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
like a picture can paint thoughts
thoughts, words can paint pictures...
rather then the analytical type of destruction in heart and vision,
we are cut loose from words by words into the very heart of voices of angels
Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Theologically one has to look only to the present dispensation of the Secret and see that God knew that this time slot would exists. Further, the promises of Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures take two (2) main streams; (a) the suffering Messiah and (b) the returning King. While Jews at the time of Christ had a very difficult time wrapping their heads around his impending death (just read the numerous times in the Gospel records where Jesus tried to convey this to his disciples and they brushed it off). This is a huge subject, but one understood by most theological institutions. In Palestine, at that time, the looked for Messiah was one who would knock around the Romans (read: Gentiles) and give the Jews back their land. The other Messiah was not that pretty a picture.
The chronology of Daniel 9 had a last seven (7) years prophesied (of really bad luck, IMHO, Jesus called it a time of great tribulation) and these would have had to work out regardless. Speaking in tongues was not just for new converts (i.e. - to all people in all languages) it was just as viable for what Paul wrote about in his Corinthian epistles. This tongues is no longer needed is Reformed and Classical Dispensationalist theological poppycock. That which is perfect is not yet come (a oblique reference IMHO to the heavenly Jerusalem that the Hebrew prophets, Jesus and Paul referenced (the well-founded city, designed and built by God). It comes to (a new) earth a while from now.
RE
Edited by roberterasmusLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
That still doesn't address the question of whether or not what we, in The Way, as well as other "charismatic" organizations, called "speaking in tongues" is even remotely similar to what was going on in the first century.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
have you read about Joseph who dream in tongues and interpreted the dream
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
well said
like Joseph...able to speak the symbolic language of dreams
such "speaking in tongues" plays a HUGE role in dream interpretation
and dreams played a HUGE role in the bible and original christianity
yet the "tongues" of modern mainstream christianity dont seem to have much to do with dreams at all
but then again...neither does modern mainstream christianity
dreams do not seem anywhere near as important now as they were to the people in scripture
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kimberly
Well, I speak in tongues and did so before twi although that is not an issue with me. Speaking in tongues is a major factor in my daily prayer life.
My mother said she spoke in tongues very early in her life. Younger sister and I discussed some years ago how we spoke in tongues when we were children but did so privately. We thought we were special and had a secret. We were and we did.
Dreams are underrated. Sometimes that is the only time Father can get anything through to me because I am too gang busters to listen when I am awake.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Here's where credibility comes back into the picture.
Wierwille taught that God talked to people in the OT through dreams because they didn't have spirit IN them, like modern day "believers", by which to receive revelation. Hence, he said, God would only talk to us in dreams if we were so far out of fellowship that He could not reach us by revelation. Furthermore, VPW taught that dreams can otherwise be the result of devil spirits trying to get into our minds through "the trap door".
Do I still believe that explanation?
No, I do not.
But, here's the thing.
If Wierwille was wrong about dreams, what makes you think he was right about tongues?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
I didn’t realize this was the only thing we could comment on in this thread. It started out without this perspective. There is no way to determine whether what we called speaking in tongue is what it was in the first century. Empirical data cannot tell us. Faking is rampant; just think of what goes on in the bedroom. The experience of people the world over tells us that it is real. I have personally been in a meeting where a gentleman stood up, spoke in tongues and interpreted. He spoke in Hebrew and interpreted in English. I rushed to him and checked his background, asked him where he had “learned” it; found out he was a simple believer who became incensed by my questions until I told him I understood the words he was speaking before he interpreted. I was pretty much blown away because I don’t understand modern Hebrew, but Biblical. This happened over 30 years ago.
Theologically, as I believe I’ve shown a bit of above, the manifestation didn’t disappear. I’ve had as many knock down/ drag outs about that as I have with professors over the existence of a Trinity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Absolutely, VP was horseapples about dreams. He never gave any real reasons for their disappearance. The “spirit on” versus “spirit in” explanation is not sufficienct if the so-called revelation and impartation manifestations were in use during the “spirit on” period, as it is quite obvious they were.
BTW, it wasn’t VP who initially wrote about speaking in tongues and I could care less whether “he was right about” them. It’s pretty obvious that they were around in the first century and history points to revivals/renewals of the use of all the manifestations throughout history. I personally think (can’t prove it…) that the Salem witch trials were about the use of SIT there. The women in the early church in New England were wild and a bit crazy (in a good way).
I, like others who have posted on this thread, spoke in tongues a long time before TWI. Thankfully VP was nowhere around to have "taught" me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
I always thought "dreams" were a form of revelation, much like "visions", the difference being a wakeful state. While I don't have a set of nailed down rules, its clear that God is capable of, and has used both. Either that, or reading the bible is a worthless chore. To me the "naming" of it is sort of a moot point, as my attitude is that God gives you what he wants to give you, but according to what you're asking about, have asked about.
Interestingly then, it wouldn't matter (from my point of view), if you called this a dream or tongues (or a rubber chicken). If God gives it to you, you have to figure out if you want to ignore that or do somethihng with it, and if you ignore it,... well then "who cares!" and that's pretty much the end of that particular activity. It ain't gonna go any further.
As to the speaking in tongues thing. I think it's genuinely given by God. When I started doing it I hadn't heard of the Way,and a lot of people do this outside of the Way. And while there are a lot of religions that disagree on the nitty-gritty, nuts and bolts of it, a lot of people that ask God for this manage to speak in tongues. Even people that attend no church have spoken in tongues. There's also the bit about them being deluded that comes to mind, but by the time people get to that bridge and start lumping people into that category (of delusional people).
As with any human endeavour, I'm sure the tongues people have their share of delusional people, but they seem to be a minority. Can the Devil send a devil spirit off to posess someone and make them speak a language they never learned? Sure, why not. But those instances don't invalidate God or his spirit working in conjunction with a person. But the result, the fruit, is how we know. I mean, does it do that individual any good? I don't mean the intrinsic, speculative kind that can't really be weighed on the scales of life. I mean some tangible, positive result. If, all it does, is sucks time and energy and possible hard earned finances out of their lives for no return, I have to question their priorities.
It's also amazing how people will allow that "sheepy" feeling to overwhelm them, and look for a Shepard. We all do this. I do. You do. At least on occasion. We look for role models, examples, etc. in life and when they fall we love to critique them. You see it everywhere in the news - sports stars, celebrities, politicians and on and on it goes. So it's Human nature that "once burned" it's ALL wrong, whatever IT was. And we're quick criticize IT. ...even the parts of IT that did have some value. I mean, we weren't sucked into IT because it had no appeal, or no value.
A wonderful Dinner with very small amounts of poison is deadly, or can make you real sick. Who wants a fork?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Nicely said Gen,
I like how Zechariah responded to the amazing things that God/the angel was showing him (who cares how…). Zech. 1:9; 4:4, 11; 6:4; 13:6
Then there’s John the Revelator… Rev. 7:13.
They were comfortable enough with that which was revealed and/or given to simply ask…
What are these?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
Well, Mr. RobertErasmus, from my study, I do not believe tongues today is what it was then. You can call my opinion "poppycock" all you want, but you have just lowered yourself to me. If you can't speak and have intelligent discussion here on doctrinal without insults, so be it. I'll just skip over your "poppycock" posts in the future.
For others: The Disciples were commanded by Jesus to spread the news of the coming Kingdom to the world. Thus, they believed he was coming back shortly, as evidenced by their asking him in his resurrection body, will you restore the Kingdom now? i.e., ok, is it coming now?
He sent them out - their "Great Commission". In order to witness to the world in a short time (because they believed the Kingdom was coming shortly, and it would have if Israel had repented and believed as Peter instructed - it was literally "at hand"), they needed to be able to speak other peoples' languages - which they did at pentecost and during the Book of Acts. I believe the manifestation of interpretation was when they were preaching to people via tongues, in their language, and there were others standing near who didn't understand, thus, interpretation was needed. For example, me and my friends speak english. One of my friends is speaking to a group that doesn't speak english via tongues, that non-english group understands and is getting blessed, but me and my english speaking friends have no clue what's being said - thus, someone needs to interpret.
We live in an age of grace that was not prophesied about or spoken of in the OT. We as believers are not called to the earthly Kingdom that is to come, nor to the City - the Heavenly Jerusalem that will descend from heaven to earth. We are called, in the age of grace, to live in the "heavenlies."
I believe tongues - as it was practiced in Acts - is not the same as what we were taught by VP. We are not commissioned to preach the coming kingdom as it is now held in abayance since Israel rejected their Messiah.
I also believe the Holy Spirit has a different "function" in this administration than the last and the one to come.
Just my "poppycock."
Edited by SunesisLink to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Sunesis,
First let me say that I was not impugning your theology, but the theology of millenia past (Reformed and Classical Dispensationalism) that teach the “manifestation of the spirit” are no longer “necessary” or “around” after Acts. Further, I couldn’t care less what Wierwille taught about the “manifestation of the spirit” and would much rather have an intelligent discussion with you or others on Scripture.
I apologize for giving you the impression that it was your personal poppycock. I will refrain from such personalization in the future. Really, I meant to discuss the actual texts themselves.
Please forgive me.
RE
PS - I dont' have the time at this present moment to reply to your post (above) in detail, but if you'll give me the opportunity to do so I will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Whether it be Adam or Moses or Jesus or others, it matters not the time in which they lived.
Time is living and breathing Now, including past present and future. All of it.
There is nothing done away with as it may seem in the scriptures as some sort of history lesson.
Everything that the scriptures record is here, now in play, in us, at any time living.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
when do not judge others to fast
tongues become a living thing
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I have yet to see anything beneficial to anyone happen because of someone's babbling of an unknown language to everyone present...
Of course I have no doubt that those who babble really think something "miraculous" is taking place.. It'd be nice if you did something helpful for a change.. Cut out that babbling and use the time to actually help someone with your actual physical body instead of trying to meditate on moving those invisible forces that just don't seem to be moving anyways.. I'm sure the invisible God can easily take of those invisible forces without your babbling about em, else you have a very underpowered God..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
I agree. Dreams can be prophetic, but they can also be wrong. Sometimes, as Solomon Burke has soulfully reminded us, a dream is "only a dream."
WRT to SIT...my ignorant and uneducated reading of the Book of Acts tells me that the apostles spoke various established languages during Pentecost, not uninterpretable or unintelligible utterances.
(Note that I did not say that there was no spiritual or psychological benefit to speaking uninterpretable or unintelligible utterances. I think there can be when done correctly.)
After several months of reading the bible sometimes I ask that question myself. However, I continue because I do enjoy reading the bible for the sheer enjoyment, and I intend to finish it from cover to cover.
I have to say, too, that the experience has been pretty exciting. I had no formal ties to any church, religion, or faith other than my standard Catholic upbringing. That means that I have nobody standing over my shoulder telling me what this and that is supposed to mean. While I did initially approach the whole bible study thing with a "Way mentality" (having been introduced to the bible by my ex-Way friend), I've since broken free of it and so I'm on my own.
But there is incredible freedom in making my own private interpretations. Also, the internet and computerized bible study tools have made it so easy to look up various translations and interpretations instantly. It's actually fun. (My God, who knew that I'd ever be reading the bible and saying it's fun?)
:)
Edited by soul searcherLink to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
No problem RobertErasmus. I do very much enjoy your sharings. But I do like the doctrinal section here and don't want anyone to be intimidated to say what they think. Of course there are going to be disagreements. The doctrinal section here to me is simply the Body of Christ talking among itself. And its lovely. Its also something we never could have done in TWI because we were all in lockstep to VPs doctrine.
I find it very interesting where people's spiritual quests have taken them after TWI and how their view of the Bible has evolved. I think God works with us in different ways. Yes, I know exactly what my view of the Bible is called and trust me, I didn't arrive there overnight, it was more like decades - but I see it in everything I read in the Bible - to me - it is obvious. To others - something else is obvious.
As I said, we are the Body of Christ talking among ourselves, and I love it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
words of gold...thank you
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.