You Need to See this if You Speak in TONGUES

Last week I posted a bunch of shorts from past breakdowns on the topic of tongues. To state my position clearly,

I believe that there is one kind of tongues, not two or three or four or seven kinds of tongues. Yes, I've heard that there are up to seven different kinds of tongues.

Those are two different types of tongues and there are five others I haven't even mentioned. Totally seven different types of tongues.

And I believe that gift to be the God -given ability to speak in an unlearned foreign language for the purpose of edifying the church that existed before the completion of the canon of scripture and as a sign of hastening judgment to unbelieving

Jews, which was fulfilled in AD 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem. While I believe God is perfectly capable of giving a man the gift of languages, say a missionary who stumbles across a tribe of people he otherwise cannot communicate with, language schools exist for a reason.

I do not believe this gift of tongues is a normal operation in the church today. As annoyed as some of you may have been as I was posting these shorts, reading the comments was fascinating and they clearly demonstrated among many charismatics in the comment section an assumed tier system in the life of Christianity.

Now there are those who believe that if you haven't spoken in tongues, you're not saved, you haven't been filled with the Holy Spirit, you're not a

Christian if you don't speak in tongues. But there are many others and probably more who believe that some Christians exercise the gift of tongues because they have risen to a level of spirituality that has escaped carnal people like me and maybe like you.

This comment is an example of what I mean. I'd like to demonstrate how this brother actually twists scripture to duck down to me.

And this isn't about me, but I want to expose how the gibberish puffs up and how those who are puffed up by the gibberish maybe aren't as spiritually minded as they think they are when they abuse scripture in an attempt to chastise the less spiritual

Christians and support their unbiblical practice. You obviously do not rightly dividing the word. You really need to quit trying to be right and pray for spiritual understanding of the scripture.

I call your attention to his citation of 1 Corinthians 2 .14. This text was referenced often by the gibberish defenders in an effort to discredit what

I was saying and I see it all the time. You're just not spiritually minded. Cite my proof text. Pat myself on the back.

So 1 Corinthians 2 .14 is thrown out by proponents of the divisive doctrine that some Christians have it and some

Christians don't. They use it to mean that someone like me and like many of you don't understand the issue of tongues because we are not spiritual

Christians. This attitude of spiritual superiority does not match that of Paul's while he's writing 1

Corinthians chapter 2. He begins in verse 1 and when I came to you brethren I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom.

He's already said in verse 18 of chapter 1 that those who consider his message to be foolishness are those who are perishing.

He is contrasting the wisdom of the world and the spirit of the world with the wisdom of God and the spirit of God.

So he says in chapter 2 verse 14 the natural man does not accept the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them.

Paul is identifying those perishing in verse 18 of chapter 1 with the natural man of verse 14 of chapter 2.

An unbeliever does not understand the things of the spirit of God because he is not born of the spirit of God. He is not born again.

He is not indwelt of the spirit or filled with the spirit or sealed by the spirit and the things of the spirit of God here refers to the wisdom of God revealed in Christ crucified for sinners.

Those who do have the spirit are able to understand because the spirit enables them. So 1 Corinthians 2 .14 is contrasting believers and unbelievers not charismatics and cessationists nor Pentecostals and reformed people.

Now the majority of people who assume the latter that it is contrasting charismatics and cessationists or spirit -filled

Christians and non -spirit -filled Christians are neither cessationist nor reformed because unlike the majority mentioned they rightly reject such a divisive interpretation of this text.

But like I said the comments were fascinating and after so many people defended this. I wanted to see what would happen if I posted this other clip of someone speaking or praying in gibberish.

Well of course people still defended the practice as thoroughly biblical even if some disagreed with the whole alone in your car filming yourself folks claimed it still biblical tongues and others called me a pharisee for noping it but what do you know this isn't tongues at all this isn't even fake biblical tongues in fact this woman isn't even a

Christian and this is the new age practice called light language which is a channeled multi -dimensional language which brings sound and energy from spirit into the physical it's your soul's language that holds your unique frequency your frequency can be encoded and shared with to clear distortions or blockages in energy apparently now you might respond well that's that's the that that's the counterfeit of the real thing this this is the real gibberish this this is the real babble right here but if that's true why did so many defend it just the same and if some of you are as spiritually superior as you claim to be why couldn't you tell the difference because it's the same thing we've got to drop the superiority complex and remember that Paul was offering correction to the church at Corinth and over that very thing that's why he spins chapter 12 talking about how there are various members of one body and how not everyone has the same gifting and reminds the church that spiritual gifts are for the common good and it's why

Paul spins chapter 13 talking about the uselessness of gifts without love two -tier

Christianity is not long -suffering it is unkind jealous braggadocious and arrogant the opposite of how