For a more detailed
1) The Rest: God spoke of the Rest as something that we absolutely MUST enter. The only scriptural position I could find in response to the ABSOLUTE STATEMENT from GOD was found in Isaiah 28:9-12. This verse placed me in a position where Tongues was the only initial outward evidence to the individual where they could know with scriptural certainty that they had entered this place of Rest. I feel cornered by this statement. If I profess to be in agreement with Hebrews Chapter 4, which emphasises the requirement of entry into the/a Rest. But cannot say amen to "stammering lips and another tongue" where does that leave me.
I thought you said you gave this some study and knew bible history? Let's have a look at the verse: Isa.28:11 "For with another tongue will he speak to this people." As you would know, the Isaiah scripture clearly records the time when the Babylonians came in to destroy and captivate Judah, and by hearing those who spoke in a foreign strange language they would know God's judgement had come. This was the rest and refreshing they were trying to enter but could not because 'they did not hear'... They would not hear. Paul refered to this terrible time in history and reminded his church that the tongues (languages) of the enemy at that terrible time were a sign of their unbelief. Tongues are a sign of God's judgement to unbelievers.
Haven't you and the rest of Revivians ever thought it weird that it says that it's another tongue he will speak to this people. It's not the this people that are actually doing the tongue speaking. It's refering to a normal human language that is different to the native tongue. Amazing how self-centred we can be to imagine that the language we personally speak is the central important one.
1 Corinthians 14 that "tongues are a sign to the unbelievers, tongues are a sign of God's judgment to unbelievers
Isaiah 28:11 "For with another tongue will he speak to this people."
This people were the Jews at Pentecost to authenticate the Gospel they were preaching. When the Northern kingdom were gobsmacked in disbelief they were taken captive by the Assyrians and could not understand the language spoken. Amazing this historical and well known even in Jewish history has been convoluted into the glossalalian theology.
GWM - Why do you think Paul refered to Isaiah 28 when refering to Tongues as a sign to the unbeliever?
Okay... I did cover that but obviously you weren't reading me because I explained what Paul was referrring to when he reminded his church of Isaiah 28... perhaps if I reword it a little for you:
Isa.28:11 "For with another tongue will he speak to this people." - by hearing those who spoke in a foreign strange language they would know God's judgement had come. Paul refered to this terrible time in history and reminded his church that the tongues are a sign of unbelief. Tongues are a sign of God's judgement to unbelievers.
You see, it's all about context. The ones in Isaiah who were speaking in another tongue were the enemy! EEK!!! He wasn't talking about.
See, the funny thing is that Paul was using the story to warn the followers of what would happen if they ignore the gospel message they were preaching. Because he slips in a reference to the enemy using another language, Revivalsists and co slip it into the bag of 'tongues' references.
The following is an excerpt from an exaustive study on the subject, it can be found 'here'.
Okay, given that we'll be touching upon Isaiah 28, I note the remarkable irony of my current situation when I read in the prophet's words (vv. 9 & 10): "Whom will he teach knowledge, and to whom will he explain the message? Those who are weaned from milk, those taken from the breast? For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little." As I hope will become clear, given the current circumstance, that the prophet's words are very ironic indeed! I strongly recommend that you have a Bible handy as you read along with what I've written, so as to follow the flow of the argument that I am attempting to make. So let's hook in!
1 comment:
Moth, ur analysis of Isaiah 28:11 does not correspond with Pauls.
You said: "....The ones in Isaiah who were speaking in another tongue were the enemy! EEK!!!"
Of the examples given in the book of Acts about speaking in tongues it was God's people who spoke it.
On the day of Pentecost "this people" was in referrence to Jews In Jerusalem which heard the disciples spoke in the language of the country they were from; and that was the sign. Acts 2 is clear on this.
Many of them came to the Lord as a result of this demonstration of the spirit Acts 2. This is what Paul was talking about in 1st Corinthians 14:22.
Moth you'll avoid error if you allow scripture to interpret itself.
Don't try to use Isaiah 28 in an historical manner to interpret what Paul meant when it's already defined in other places in the new testament, Acts 2 namely.
Be mindful of correct exegeses.... next point:
==================================
There are no examples given of the enemy speaking in tongues in scripture -and I'm not saying the enemy doesn't counterfeit God's gift, he does.
However Scripture does not waste time making a case for fake tongues, but focuses on the reality, the understanding and exercising of the gift of speaking in tongues in orderly manner.
I've read another posting of yours regarding tongues and you've spent more time talking about what's fake and only a few sentence to say tongues are legitimate.
If I was seeking answers to the tongues question just by reading two of your postings on the subject I would be discouraged to engage in this Biblical practice.
the idea of not wanting to engage in speaking in tongues is this the sense you want believers come away with when reading your piece? Is this your motive?
Post a Comment