Denominational Problems, How does yours stand up? Options

[Kontroll]

Not all protestants. I guess I am sorta considered a Protestant cause that is a form of Christianity but I am falling more in the catagory of Pentacostal.

Demonic influences. Holy spirit and tongues are both brought up in the Bible, so are you denying God's word about tongues? I think they are FAR from demonic. I have a Question, are you a Christian? If so, what Faith are you? Because I don't know one Christian that believes that tongues is demonic. Heres some verses from the Bible:

Acts 2:4 - All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

Acts 10:46 - For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

1 Corinthians 14:39 - Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

If the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues are demonic why would God say to speak in tongues and not deny it. Did you know that denying the holy ghost is blasphemy and is unforgivable by God?

I KNOW ITS LONG. BUT ITS INFORMATIVE.

NOTE: It's useful to know that the two main sects of Christianity are Catholic and Protestant. When I say Protestant I mean any denomination that falls under that category.

Now, onto the fun stuff.

I'm not saying in any way, shape or form that the Pentecostal denomination is incorrect. They believe that you must be saved by the grace of our Lord Jesus to enter into Heaven.

We both have that in common.

Now, what in my faith that is present in yours is the topic of charismatic beliefs. Such as what was discussed earlier.

http://www.bible-truth.org/tongues.htm
I will note what I am citing from outside sources.
- - -
For the many Charismatics, their prayer life is one of praying in ecstatic speech without their understanding. Prayer is thus reduced to an emotional experience instead of pouring out their hearts in thanksgiving and presenting their petitions and supplications to the Lord. Those "praying in tongues" do not even know what they are praying. The services of the tongues movement is completely opposite of what the Bible teaches concerning worshiping God. They come to "receive" a blessing from the service, instead of coming to lift up other believers and worship the Lord as the Bible teaches. The "worship" of these churches is little more than a form of entertainment with an emotional experience, not unlike what happens in a musical rock concert.

John 4:24 clearly states, those that worship the Lord must do so in "spirit and truth."

How Does the Modern Gift of Tongues Compare to the Examples in the Book of Acts?

1. Missing in the modern practice of tongues is the supernatural acts of God as the event being accompanied by the sound as of a mighty rushing wind which fills the whole house and the appearance of cloven tongues of fire.

2. The modern gift of tongues is used as a so called "prayer language." There is only one verse in the Bible that seems to associate tongues with prayer. In 1 Corinthians 14:14-15, Paul says, "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is the result then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit and will also sing with understanding. Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit how will he who occupies the place of the uninformed say, `Amen' at your giving of thanks, since he does not understand what you say? You indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified. I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than you all, yet in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue."

Paul goes on to say, "Brethren, do not be children in understanding: however, in malice babes, but in understanding be mature." Clearly Paul is condemning the misuse of tongues among the Corinthians as a prayer language. His rebuke is plain and establishes clearly that the gift of biblical tongues was not a prayer language. I says he would rather speak five word with his understanding that ten thousand words in tongues. Could God be make it any clearer that tongues is not given as a prayer language.

Is tongues a valid prayer language? The answer is no. At Pentecost it was a sign to unbelieving Jews, in which they heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In Acts 2:11, it says that those present testified, ". . . we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." (Acts 2:11) Paul in 1 Corinthians 14: 14, is correcting the error of using tongues as prayer language. He says, in verse 15, that he would pray and sing both with his understanding, because to do otherwise is unfruitful. Plainly Paul is condemning those that had perverted the gift of tongues by teaching it was a prayer language. Earlier in verse 2, he concluded that when men spoke in tongues no one understood but God. He points out the singing and praying in a language that no one else knows does not help that person by teaching those present the truth. This is always in view in the Biblical and correct use of tongues. Paul emphatically states that tongues is not for believers, but a sign for unbelievers who hear the Gospel truth in their own language. The whole thesis of Paul addressing "tongues" in 1 Corinthians is that no one should be speaking tongues in the presence of others hearers who could not understand what was being said. (1 Cor. 14:33-40)

Using tongues as prayer language clearly violates 1 Corinthians 14:22, and this condemns the modern tongues movement as false, because it teaches in error it is special prayer language.

I believe in a movement called Cessationism. "In Christian theology, cessationism is the view that the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as tongues, prophecy and healing, ceased being practiced early on in Church history.

Cessationists usually believe the miraculous gifts were given only for the foundation of the Church, during the time between the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, c. AD 33 (see Acts 2) and the fulfillment of God's purposes in history, usually identified as either the completion of the last book of the New Testament or the death of the last Apostle. Its counterpart is continuationism."

Words in quotes are from www.wikipedia.org

That's my two cents.

[Kontroll]

Cause what we were talking about had nothing to do with Evolution.

[sweetangel2128]

Cause what we were talking about had nothing to do with Evolution.

Makes sense and good idea