Why do I have to speak in tongues?

[Kutless]

1. In Acts 2 those who rec'd the HG spoke in many different languages and each of the crowd heard ALL the disciples speaking in their own native tongue. This is not consistent with the "HEAVENLY LANGUAGE" position.

2. Why are there not similar manifestations accompanied with infilling as the Day of Pentecost?


3. After Acts 2 we don't find evidence that anyone spoke in other languages, they only spoke WITH tongues.


4. Could it be that this seems to indicate that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost are 2 separate things? One sealing a convert's eternal salvation, and the other empowering the recipient with supernatural abilities.

The best answer IMHO is one does not have to speak in tongues.

But, when one receives the Holy Ghost they will speak in tongues. This was and is the Biblical confirmation that one has received the Holy Ghost.

Acts 10:44-46

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
KJV

Acts 19:6

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
KJV

[Kutless]

Originally Posted by Gary Blacksher

The best answer IMHO is one does not have to speak in tongues.

But, when one receives the Holy Ghost they will speak in tongues. This was and is the Biblical confirmation that one has received the Holy Ghost.

Acts 10:44-46

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
KJV

Acts 19:6

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
KJV

there is no doubt that they spoke in tongues. But no where in scripture will you find support for the heavenly language.

In what tongue were they speaking?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Kutless

there is no doubt that they spoke in tongues. But no where in scripture will you find support for the heavenly language.

In what tongue were they speaking?

There is no question that speaking in unknown tongues accompanied many NT believers conversion to Christ. The Jews had the context of hearing the 120 at Pentecost speak in tongues, so they easily could associate speaking in tongues with the baptism of the Spirit. And rightly so, however scripture does not in any place explicitly say that tongues MUST accompany the infilling.

In my experience in the UPC, there was never a focus on the fact that there were many foreigners in Jerusalem or that the purpose of tongues could quite logically have been for the propagation of the Gospel to the uttermost regions of the world represented in Jerusalem that day.

Many times in scripture God has used a thing, such as the brazen serpent in the wilderness for a very good reason, afterward men make an idol of that thing for all time. I do believe tongues are a valid spiritual function, however maybe the purpose has been abused.

[Kutless]

Originally Posted by crakjak

There is no question that speaking in unknown tongues accompanied many NT believers conversion to Christ. The Jews had the context of hearing the 120 at Pentecost speak in tongues, so they easily could associate speaking in tongues with the baptism of the Spirit. And rightly so, however scripture does not in any place explicitly say that tongues MUST accompany the infilling.

In my experience in the UPC, there was never a focus on the fact that there were many foreigners in Jerusalem or that the purpose of tongues could quite logically have been for the propagation of the Gospel to the uttermost regions of the world represented in Jerusalem that day.

Many times in scripture God has used a thing, such as the brazen serpent in the wilderness for a very good reason, afterward men make an idol of that thing for all time. I do believe tongues are a valid spiritual function, however maybe the purpose has been abused.

At what reference are you finding "Unknown" tongue?

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Kutless

At what reference are you finding "Unknown" tongue?

Alot of people use this verse Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

Or pretty much the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 14.

The truth is there are many different types of tongues. Even when we speak in tongues we speak to God that does not mean that no one else can understand it. I have an ex girl friend that went to a mission trip in the Philippines and a girl there got the HG and spoke in english. These things happen. God only knows.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Kutless

At what reference are you finding "Unknown" tongue?

They were unknown to the speakers, wouldn't you agree?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Kutless

At what reference are you finding "Unknown" tongue?

Unknown tongues the term simply refers to the fact that they were speaking in a language they did not naturally learn. Otherwise it was them doing it, not the Spirit

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Kutless

there is no doubt that they spoke in tongues. But no where in scripture will you find support for the heavenly language.

In what tongue were they speaking?

The heavenly language argument comes not from Acts but from 1corinthians

1Co 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The heavenly language argument comes not from Acts but from 1corinthians

1Co 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Bump