Prophesying Versus Speaking In Tongues

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Telling of good works IS PRAISE!

Acts 2:11 KJV Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

Psalms 107:8 KJV Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!

*sigh*

Brother Blume I am really disappointed sometimes in what I see coming to me in your posts. You have been a man of great honesty and sometimes it seems you are attempting to stretch the word.

Okay... but I'll take my time and demonstrate what I am talking about.

This verse does not, by any stretch of anyones imagination, define the telling of God's good works as praise, praise only, and only praise never to ever, ever be anything else.. Now... we all know praise CAN BE telling of God's good works.

But... let's look at your verse.

Originally Posted by mfblume

Psalms 107:8 KJV Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!
[/indent]

Oh that men would praise the LORD... FOR His goodness.... FOR his wonderful works.

I can praise Him for many things. But that doesn't automatically make every single time anyone mentions Gods wonderful works praise, praise only, and nothing but praise.

You know that Brother Blume. Why are you grasping so hard at straws?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

*sigh*

Brother Blume I am really disappointed sometimes in what I see coming to me in your posts. You have been a man of great honesty and sometimes it seems you are attempting to stretch the word.

Wow. If this does not take the cake!!!

Brother! You claim I am acting dishonestly and stretching the word??? I plainly proved that PRAISING INCLUDES SPEAKING THE WONDERFUL WORKS OF GOD. The verses in Psalm prove it. I mean, it tells us to praise God by speaking of his wonderful works, and you say I am dishonest in quoting that and saying Praise IS INDEED speaking his wonderful works??

Brother, talk about dishonesty! Whew!

Okay... but I'll take my time and demonstrate what I am talking about.

This verse does not, by any stretch of anyones imagination, define the telling of God's good works as praise, praise only, and only praise never to ever, ever be anything else..

Now, did I said speaking his wonderful works IS PRAISE ONLY? Give me a break here. Lol

Someone said SPEAKING WONDERFUL WORKS IS NOT PRAISE. I showed where it is. Had I been challenged that speaking of his wonderful works IS NOT PRAISE ALONE, that woudl be one thing for me to respond with that Psalm. But that is not what was said, and that is not what I responded to with the Psalm!

Please!

If you told me that cars are not blue, I would not think you were telling me that the only things that are blue are NOT cars. Do not change the point I addressed.

Now... we all know praise CAN BE telling of God's good works.

Well, that is not what I was told. I was told praise IS NOT speaking the wonderful works of God.

But... let's look at your verse.



Oh that men would praise the LORD... FOR His goodness.... FOR his wonderful works.

I can praise Him for many things. But that doesn't automatically make every single time anyone mentions Gods wonderful works praise, praise only, and nothing but praise.

You did the same mistake again! Think of it. It is ALSO NOT SAYING you CANNOT SPEAK OF HIS WONDERFUL WORKS WHEN YOU PRAISE HIM FOR THEM!

First of all, if you are going to call someone dishonest and stretching, then don't change the argument one made by changing the original statement the argument addressed. And secondly, do not change the argument as though I claimed the ONLY way to speak of his wonderful works is to praise. I addressed the statement PRAISE IS NOT SPEAKING ABOUT WONDERFUL WORKS OF GOD. And I stand by my word that this is proved wrong by the Psalm I quoted. Nothing more nor less.

You know that Brother Blume. Why are you grasping so hard at straws?

Straws? (Whew!)

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

Most things become no brainers when we have a working assumption that helps guide our Know brain.

They each heard them tell the wonderful works of God in their own tongue.

It can't be an assumption that we make to say that they spoke in tongues... there...see... your wrong... it wasn't prophecy.

They were telling of the wonderful works of God in people's own tongue.

I'm not saying that what I am stating is THE case but what I am presenting is that that Peter stood there and said... THIS IS THAT.... quoting a verse that says when God does pour out His spirit on all flesh they will prophesy...

And we know that while they were speaking in tongues... they were speaking in the languages understood by those around... and they heard them speak the wonderful works of God.

So... while I am not saying that this IS the case. Isn't it at least worthy of consideration that what was going on that day is that they were prophesying (per what Joel had said would happen) in the language of those who were there so they could hear and know that this was the fulfillment of Joel 2?

For Peter to say THIS IS THAT and then for there to be none of the things listed in the verse he quoted going on in front of their eyes doesn't make sense.

It would be like me quoting a verse that says people would lay down and then point at a bunch of people jumping in circles and say SEE... THIS IS THAT.

To use your reasoning, "THIS IS THAT" included a lot more than prophesying, while tongues are distinguished from prophecy in 1 Cor 14. Joel also said that the sun would turn black and the moon to blood. Did that occur that day? After all, he said THIS IS THAT.

The fact is that THIS IS THAT specifically pointed to the SPIRIT OUTPOURING Joel foretold. IN fact that supports and confirms the argument that tongues is evidence of the BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT. Joel foretold VISIONS, which did not occur that day, as well as dreams, etc. Tongues were not even mentioned in Joel, but it was the TONGUES that caught the attention of the people, and what Peter equated with the Spirit pouring out. This shows that tongues is part of Spirit outpouring in every case, or Peter would not say the TONGUES was the Spirit outpouring.

The subject of the overall thought was not prophesying. It was the Spirit being poured out. That is what the THAT pointed to in Peter's words. TONGUES. Tongues was no more prophesying than it was dreaming or seeing visions. I mean ACTS 2 SAYS "THEY SPOKE WITH TONGUES". We do not read, "And they all began to prophesy as the Spirit gave them utterance," let alone the fact that the epistles clearly distinguish tongues from prophesying.

Sorry, bro., I think someone else is stretching things.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

To use your reasoning, "THIS IS THAT" included a lot more than prophesying, while tongues are distinguished from prophecy in 1 Cor 14. Joel also said that the sun would turn black and the moon to blood. Did that occur that day? After all, he said THIS IS THAT.

The fact is that THIS IS THAT specifically pointed to the SPIRIT OUTPOURING Joel foretold. IN fact that supports and confirms the argument that tongues is evidence of the BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT. Joel foretold VISIONS, which did not occur that day, as well as dreams, etc. Tongues were not even mentioned in Joel, but it was the TONGUES that caught the attention of the people, and what Peter equated with the Spirit pouring out. This shows that tongues is part of Spirit outpouring in every case, or Peter would not say the TONGUES was the Spirit outpouring.

The subject of the overall thought was not prophesying. It was the Spirit being poured out. That is what the THAT pointed to in Peter's words. TONGUES. Tongues was no more prophesying than it was dreaming or seeing visions. I mean ACTS 2 SAYS "THEY SPOKE WITH TONGUES". We do not read, "And they all began to prophesy as the Spirit gave them utterance," let alone the fact that the epistles clearly distinguish tongues from prophesying.

Sorry, bro., I think someone else is stretching things.

Good post, Bro.Blume!

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

I love it when quotes like this one come into a conversation like this. It reminds me to go and study that series of verses.

First... the quote sure tells something doesn't it?

Here is the scripture.



And there are other things that follow this verse that those who believe will do. But we remember... they shall speak with other tongues. One would think that casting out devils would be as popular and as prevalent as tongues but we emphasize tongues so much this is where we focus.

But... Let's take a look at the discourse. I need to get to church so this will have to be short.


Jesus said go and tell the world about this gospel.


He that believeth and is baptized will be saved. If you go out and tell this gospel to people... and they believe it... the will be saved.


Now this is the part that makes me smile. I know what I have been told this series of scriptures say. I know that I have believed it without even studying it myself. These three verses together say (as I have been told) that when you're saved... you'll speak in tongues.

But let's step back and just take a look.

Preach the gospel.
If they believe the gospel they will be saved.
These signs shall follow them that believe. Now... if they believe... they are saved. And the signs are signs that follow saved people.

You disagree don't you?

Well let's look again. Not even worrying about the fact that what I just said is what the scripture said...

These signs shall follow those that believe.
1. They shall cast out devils. Now tell me. Who of you has an expectation that a possible sign that someone has just been saved is that they turn around and cast out a devil? Nobody. Nobody looks for that. If that happened we'd all stare at each other and say... WHAT? But yet that is the FIRST sign given in a list that should all pertain to one another isn't it?
2. They shall speak with other tongues. etc.
3. They shall take up serpents.
4. If they drink poison it won't hurt them.

I can see it now... Come on brother... you about to receive the Holy Ghost... and now we know... he is saved... because he drank poison, handled a snake and cast out a devil.

We all know that every other thing in that list has nothing to do with initial evidence but we cherry pick tongues and use this scripture to back up that notion. I know... because I've done it. As a matter of fact... I've done it up until... this post. But study opened my eyes.

Brother D4T... I love you man!

[Rev]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

I found this study that I have been involving myself in to be very interesting... A discussion in another thread sent me studying the Word again and it never ceases to amaze what will come out of the word when it is opened.

This is OT....

The Spirit rested upon them... and they prophesied.


Samuel is speaking to Saul (who is not a prophet by his own right). But Samuel told him that the spirit of the LORD would come upon him and he would prophesy and when he saw this sign... he knew God was with him.




Joel said... I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh... and they shall... among other things... prophesy. Peter recalls this scripture stating that THIS IS THAT. What happened on the day of Pentecost... was what this scripture was speaking. These are the things that will happen...







And they understood them... And when they understood them they heard them speak the wonderful things of God.



So... Peter said... THIS IS THAT... the "this is that" he spoke of was Joel's prophesy. Joel's prophesy was that their sons & daughters would prophesy.

What does a prophesy look like? It speaks of the wonderful works of God and that is exactly what happened on the day of Pentecost. It happened in each of their languages so they could all hear it and understand it.

Peter was saying... Joel said your sons & daughters will prophesy... and this is that.

But when we see the scripture below we nearly ignore the word prophesy. All we see is tongues. Of the 12 people did speak in tongues. But people did also prophesy because prophesying when the spirit of the Lord comes upon you is a long established sign even from OT times.

What would we think if the following verse said... "And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did speak in tongues."? We'd think it was speaking of their actual conversion most likely. But we don't think about this possibly being their conversion because it says they prophesied even though prophecy is a well established sign of the infilling of the Holy Spirit.



It is amazing how we focus on tongues so very much when the Bible focused much, much more on prophesying. The Bible often touts prophesying as a sign. A sign of God's spirit coming upon his people.

(1Co 14:5) 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.

What God wants is the edifying of the church.

There is no difference between the one that prophecies and the one that speaks in tongues and then interrupts the message.

They are equal because the church receives edification.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Rev

(1Co 14:5) 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.

What God wants is the edifying of the church.

There is no difference between the one that prophecies and the one that speaks in tongues and then interrupts the message.

They are equal because the church receives edification.

That's what I was trying to say with my equation T + I = P
Tongues Plus Interpretation equals Prophecy
and my analogy that tongues plus interpretation were like two nickels which equal one dime (prophecy)

[Rev]

Originally Posted by Sam

That's what I was trying to say with my equation T + I = P
Tongues Plus Interpretation equals Prophecy
and my analogy that tongues plus interpretation were like two nickels which equal one dime (prophecy)

I like scripture so much better than analogy.

Some people use analogy that scripture won't confirm.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Prophesying can be speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost,also prophesying can be predictive,depending on the context.It can be foretelling or forthtelling,to me when the bible says they spoke in tongues and prophesied,they meant they where speaking as the Holy Ghost gave them the utterance.

The gift of prophecy in 1.COR 12 and the gifts of tongues are the not same things that as in ACTS.19:6 Because the gifts in 1.COR.12 are for congregation use for the edification of The body of Christ.
Also compare ACTS.19:6 with ACTS 10:6 would not magnifying God be considered as prophesying.Would not speech that is spoken under the inspiration of The Lord that magnifies God be considered as prophesying ?

I feel speaking in tongues is a normative accompanying sign of being baptized in The Holy Ghost and it is a privilege of believers to receive.

Now if anybody disagrees with me on this,I'll still love you and still be your friend.