The Gift of Tongues

[Adelphos]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

Tongues is a sign gift according to 1 Cor 14:22, but P/C leaders teach often that it is an essential gift of the Spirit (by reason of "it is the initial evidence").

There are plenty of Scripture examples to establish the truth that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Gift of the Holy Spirit.

Contrary to this, the Bible teaches that the sign gifts were for authenticating the revelation of the New Covenant, and implies that subsequent generations did not need it or have it - Heb. 2:3-4 "...which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard [Him], God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit..."

1. Does confirmation of the Gospel still need to take place?

2. Exactly where in the Hebrews p***ages say this confirming process would ever stop?

In addition, none of the antenicene fathers wrote anything on this subject as if it was something ongoing throughout the generations. In fact, the tongues movement is a fairly recent 20th century movement, which is a red-flag indication that it is quite possibly a cult movement.

Hmmmmm....

1. The church fathers didn't write about a lot of things.

2. So, is it a red flag indicator that the teaching of "Justification by Faith" didn't get taught until the 1500s? Does that mean it is a false doctrine then?

3. So, all denominations that started 1500 years or later after the early church was around is "possibly a cult movement?" That is what you are inferring in my opinion. You may want to rethink this argument!

Respectfully

Adelphos

[tdidymas]

Originally Posted by Adelphos

There are plenty of Scripture examples to establish the truth that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Gift of the Holy Spirit.

Please list, since I cannot think of any.

Originally Posted by Adelphos

1. Does confirmation of the Gospel still need to take place?

Confirmation of the gospel today is only done by illumination of the Holy Spirit, which is a supernatural event, but not miraculous. A miraculous event is one in which many people witness, which has no natural cause. There are no miraculous events taking place for the authentication of the gospel, since the NT gospels were written. It is no longer "new revelation" in which God is using miraculous events to authenticate it (Heb. 2). If you differ with this, then please give both scriptural evidence, and historical evidence.

Originally Posted by Adelphos

2. Exactly where in the Hebrews p***ages say this confirming process would ever stop?

2:1-4. If you read it carefully, it indicates that Jesus and the apostles performed authenticating miracles, but not himself (the writer of Heb). All written historical evidence indicates that miracles ceased after the 1st century (I'm talking about gospel-authenticating miraculous events, not healings and Providential activities that God does for people all over the world on an ongoing basis).

Originally Posted by Adelphos

1. The church fathers didn't write about a lot of things.

They wrote about quite a lot of things, if you investigate.

Originally Posted by Adelphos

2. So, is it a red flag indicator that the teaching of "Justification by Faith" didn't get taught until the 1500s? Does that mean it is a false doctrine then?

3. So, all denominations that started 1500 years or later after the early church was around is "possibly a cult movement?" That is what you are inferring in my opinion. You may want to rethink this argument!

This is not a valid argument. One could say in response to this that the Trinity idea is cultic, unless you hold to the modalistic idea, and then that is deemed as cultic also. You mistake the reformation as the first to teach justification by faith, but this is not correct. It became a big deal in the reformation because the Roman Catholics had largely lost the essential application of it (I'm speaking of application, not official church doctrine). In fact, Augustine taught justification by faith. Since it was not a major issue at the time, it was not explained as clearly as in the reformation days. In fact, the NT scriptures should have been sufficient for proving the doctrine of justification by faith, and most likely was taught from the scriptures for hundreds of years. Therefore your idea that justification by faith was a new doctrine of the 16th century is not correct. On the other hand, the P/C doctrines on tongues are a 20th century phenomenon.

I hope I have sufficiently answered.
TD