 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 About Wesley and tongues |
drmrc |
Hello, 2nd Gen,
Wesley was obviously a "tongues friendly" man. In certain places in his journals and in his writings, he references those around him who spoke in tongues and he writes favorably of this spiritual manifestation.
However, there is no record of Wesley himself speaking in tongues. On the website of one Methodist renewal movement, it states, "Although there is no record that Wesley himself ever spoke in tongues, there is evidence that he believed that this gift of the Holy Spirit was a legitimate gift for the Church of any age."
(http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/rtuttle1.html)
I often refer to Wesley as the Great Grandfather of the Pentecostal movement. So much of what he taught and did, laid the foundatiion for modern Pentecostalism.
However, just because there is not "record" it doesn't mean that he did not speak in tongues. Only God know that answer.
Be blessed.
Mike Chapman |
Friendly Face
Posts: 300
3/29/08 10:53 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Is it or isn't it???? |
The Woodcarver |
____________________
Evidently there is room for doubt for the question to be discussed in this manner.
In reality the Pentecostal concept of 'speaking in tongues' is the initial, physical evidence that one is Pentecostal or Charismatic but is not evidence that one is filled with the Spirit of God. |
Hey, DOC
Posts: 72
4/1/08 9:44 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Yes |
doyle |
I do believe Speaking in Tongues is an initial evidence.
Agreed, there are more evidences of a Spirit-filled life than Speaking in Tongues, but according to Acts Chapter 2, when the disciples were filled they began to speak.
However, I think one of the greatest signs of the Holy Spirit infilling is seldom mentioned and it's also in Acts Chapter 2 which says "And they continued steadfastly..."
_________________
The largest room in the world is the room for improvement. |
Acts-celerate Owner
Posts: 6957
4/2/08 1:35 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| ..... |
MayB2Day |
| nt |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1909
8/10/08 11:31 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
DHDRabbi |
| I believe that speaking in tongues is, without question, the initial evidence of the coming of the Holy Spirit. It happened on the day of Pentecost. That was the initial evidence that He came to us. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13680
11/18/08 8:27 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
mytimewillcome |
| DHDRabbi wrote: | | I believe that speaking in tongues is, without question, the initial evidence of the coming of the Holy Spirit. It happened on the day of Pentecost. That was the initial evidence that He came to us. |
Agreed. Initial evidence is not the same as a continual evidence though. One can have gifts of the Spirit besides tongues only after the initial evidence of tongues. One might speak in tongues at the baptism and never do so again. |
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3658
11/18/08 2:33 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Poimen |
| DHDRabbi wrote: | | I believe that speaking in tongues is, without question, the initial evidence of the coming of the Holy Spirit. It happened on the day of Pentecost. That was the initial evidence that He came to us. |
 That was clever, Rab. VERY clever. 
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher
Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay." |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
11/18/08 3:49 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
DHDRabbi |
Well...initial evidence is never mentioned in the Bible, yet we have made it heresy not to believe it.
What is most important...that a person live a Spirit-filled life with the Fruit evident OR that they said a few words in tongues as a teenager and then NOTHING. In our COG culture, we would say the teenager was filled but Billy Graham was not. Sorry, but I don't believe it for a moment. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13680
11/19/08 12:18 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Ichthus77 |
| DHDRabbi wrote: | Well...initial evidence is never mentioned in the Bible, yet we have made it heresy not to believe it.
What is most important...that a person live a Spirit-filled life with the Fruit evident OR that they said a few words in tongues as a teenager and then NOTHING. In our COG culture, we would say the teenager was filled but Billy Graham was not. Sorry, but I don't believe it for a moment. |
I don´t believe in that "spoke a couple words and never spoke again" stuff. It seems thats an old COG doctrine in some places. I´ve heard of it before. Haven´t ever heard that in the A/G or other Pentecostal denominations. While I DO believe speaking in tongues is the initial sign that accompanies the Baptism, I believe tongues is always a full language and it stays with you if it´s the genuine experience according to the pattern in Acts. Otherwise it can easily be emotion or imitation of someone else if you don´t recieve a LANGUAGE (tongue)
_________________
 |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1270
11/24/08 12:44 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Bro Bob |
Ichthus77,
Merely to probe the point I think you are representing, that speaking in tongues should continue on a regular basis for every spirit filled believer...
I think that is what you said...
But I wonder if 1 Corinthians 12, the first 15 or so verses are problematic for your understanding.
Especially verse 10:
| Quote: | | To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: |
I can tell you I do not possess the gift of tongues, but I know people who have that gift.
Interestingly, even though the Bible is clear that he who speaks should pray for the interpretation, I don't know that I have ever heard these with the gift of tongues to also interpret.
Just an observation FWIW.
I can't tell you how shocked I was the first time I had the interpretation ( and confirmation of it, but that is a long story) and was too scared to say anything because nothing was going to come out in King James English. My dad talked pretty hard to me about my decision and my rationale for remaining silent, and he wasn't even in the service.
Recently, at church, as the pastor was about to give the benediction, he looked at me and could sense a spirit in me and asked if I needed to say something, and as I began to speak, words ( in southern English) and phrases and thoughts I had never had or used just came out. A message in tongues had been given out, but had gone without interpretation earlier, and I did not then, nor do I now believe my utterances to have been an interpretation of that message.
I had never done that, and am not really itching to do it again. But when I opened my eyes our altars were full, and people were weeping and praying and seeking God everywhere.
The last time I spoke in tongues I was sick. Horrible stomach pains (with the evidence!). I had begun praying for my friends, and for their families and for their lost loved ones, and I ended up praying as smoothly and naturally in words and syllables that I do not know.
Yet I do not have the gift of tongues. But there's no man alive can convince me that I am devoid of the holy spirit.
This post is on Friday night, the same week as the trial of Bro Chapman. Bro Chapman, if you are reading this, I would like to ask you one question: Rather than as a matter of ecclesiastical study, I would like to know what is your testimony as a witness before God and man, was speaking in tongues the first evidence you had that you had been filled when you received?
If you don't want to post a reply publicly, I certainly understand that in light of this week's drama. And you don't have to reply any time soon. But I have now read what you said, and I find no fault in your questioning ANYthing that we believe, or we teach, or YOU believe, or you have been taught.
I think Paul did as much when he said, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ Jesus we are of all men most miserable."
It means he considered the possibility that Jesus was not all that he said he was, and that if that were the case, plan B for Paul was that there simply was no God if Christ was not God with us.
So, privately if it suits you, and however many days or weeks from now that you deem practical, I would simply like to hear your testimony of how it was when you were first filled. I give my word, whatever you express in confidence will remain in confidence. There are several here who can attest to my ability to keep that promise.
Blessing to all the brethren. May the peace of God rest tonight on all the brethren, (not gender specific of course) and especially those who carry the burden of leadership so the rest of us can fuss about the small stuff.
BB |
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3944
2/20/09 9:48 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dr. Jim Bob DD |
| Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | | Now, far as Blesseds silly suggestion that the fruit a the spirit is the only thing the booger man cant mimic, hey, Im still laughin over at one. Satan can mimic ever single one of em--as needed--for the purpose a deception an heretical purposes......... |
Fo Shizzle on that one.
_________________
Dr Jim Bob Tytle, DD |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1958
7/24/09 7:32 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
Can it be a physical evidence of the Holy Spirit coming on someone? Yes. Does the Bible teach that it is the Exclusive evidence? No.
Let's consider the Biblical evidence.
In Acts 2, 'they all spoke with tongues.
In Acts 10 at least some spoke with tongues and at least some magnified God.
In Acts 19 at least some that the Spirit fell upon spoke with tongues and at least some prophesied.
When the Holy Spirit came on Zecharias, he prophesied.
Furthermore, I Corinthians 14 teaches us that tongues are not a sign to believers. So why is it that so many Pentecostals think that tongues is a sign to the individual and the other believers present that someone is filled with the Spirit? Is this a Biblical way of thinking?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
10/11/09 10:42 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Link wrote: | Can it be a physical evidence of the Holy Spirit coming on someone? Yes. Does the Bible teach that it is the Exclusive evidence? No.
Let's consider the Biblical evidence.
In Acts 2, 'they all spoke with tongues.
In Acts 10 at least some spoke with tongues and at least some magnified God.
In Acts 19 at least some that the Spirit fell upon spoke with tongues and at least some prophesied.
How can anyone say that the Bible teaches the initial evidence doctrine as it has traditionally been presented in Pentecostalism?
When the Holy Spirit came on Zecharias, he prophesied.
Furthermore, I Corinthians 14 teaches us that tongues are not a sign to believers. So why is it that so many Pentecostals think that tongues is a sign to the individual and the other believers present that someone is filled with the Spirit? Is this a Biblical way of thinking? |
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
10/11/09 10:43 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
