BIBLOS | Part I - Is Speaking In Tongues In The Old Testament? 

Me too!

Thank you Sis. Linda. We will be praying for Roxanne.

Thank you. Joseph headed up the reboot. He does a great job with Biblos.

I had chemo 20 yrs ago. Have her drink Ginger tea. Keep her sipping it all day into the night

And the Lord will make a way

What Im saying about ginger tea is I always kept the tea w me around the clock. Keep it in your system.I never needed the nausea pills for the 8 rounds of chemo.

@@MaryButeau-cq8cb I will tell my Sister In Law. Do You add Honey to it?

@@lindahood9854 no

🙂 I am very thankful for their support. Their zeal helps to expand our reach though I doubt it is in the way they intended.

Amen I was thinking about this tonight! I would have never in a million years chose to strive to live for Jesus it is only by Gods grace I seen/ crave His holy truth!🫶🏻

It's very true. Isaiah 28 not only states that we would speak with other tongues, but that "they would not hear". He literally prophesies their unbelief in advance. It is such a powerful portion of scripture.

@@pastorurshan Amen!!

Today I did🙂

@@pastorurshan 😀 Thank you for this message!!

Acts 2:39 KJVS For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. The Bible is the authority not man’s opinion. In all the records of converts they spoke in tongues. Acts 19:1-6 KJVS And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, [2] He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. [3] And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. [4] Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. [5] When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [6] And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. God gives His Holy Ghost to enable us to live with His power to overcome the world. Jesus told the disciples to wait at Jerusalem until the power from on high fell upon them. It is the sign that you have been born of the Spirit John 3:5. Clinging to man’s opinion does not bring salvation. Proverbs 14:12 KJVS There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. Unfortunately many have led people astray because of their unbiblical teachings. They teach against the Holy Ghost which is a form of blaspheming the Holy Ghost. Seek God. That’s what I did, and while in worship I began to speak an unknown language. The Bible is truth.

Please take note that you have to read in context. Context is king when interpretation of scripture is happening. The whole issue is about the order of a Church service. Paul did not say one better interpret the tongues spoken. This again is talking about while the pastor is giving a sermon. Worship is the difference, it is supposed to be you and God, why would I try to tell someone they don’t have the right to speak to God through His Holy Ghost? You add words to scripture, that is worse. You read scripture to fit your understanding, not God speaking His understanding. I have been in Pentecostal Church services and have witnessed them honor what Paul taught. I have seen the Pastor stop the person when out of order. I have witnessed one that Spoke in tongues before the actual start of a sermon, and an interpretation was given, and the presence of God was thick. I have also witnessed that all those that speak against this gift are liars. They are like the Pharisees that accused Jesus of having a demon, of which He warned them about blaspheming the Holy Ghost. Ignorance of spiritual things is dangerous.

@hargisP2 Again, excuse me... where does it say when "The Pastor is giving the Sermon"? Give me the verse please. You are adding to the Word when making statements like that. Verses 27,28 says, "IF ANY MAN SPEAK IN A TONGUE (Unknown/Ecstatic) LET IT BE..." What is out of context here. Where are you getting your teaching from? No such wording about Pastor and Sermon here or even a hint of this. Please show the text where it says what you say,or those who taught you this incorrect doctrine

@hargisP2 I have just quoted scripture you have added your thoughts and stories. I never said anything against Speaking in a Tongue/Tongues with an interpretation following. But ongoing Ecstatic Utterances by many during service is incorrect behavior according to Paul's writing, it doesn't edify the body when no one understands what they are saying. See what Paul says vs.6-13. Is Paul speaking out of context?

​@@hargisP2What? You have nothing to say?

The Pentecostal Church adheres to that passage, I have witnessed it first hand. The only time they are speaking in tongues at once is during worship and prayer. While worshiping God you shouldn’t be focused on what others are doing. You read the whole chapter out of context. You read your opinion into scripture. I know of Baptist and even Methodist churches that while in worship many were speaking in tongues. Only in the last 30-40 years has the teaching against the Holy Ghost has run God out of the churches. As the Bible predicted the apostasy of the falling away. I checked out the Pentecostal Church and found that the others were liars.

@hargisP2 Excuse me? The context of Is.28 is not, to keep it short, a prophecy of Speaking in Tongues. Read the chapter then read the Biblical Prophecy of this day that Isaiah is talking about in, Deut28:49, Jer.5:15, Ez.3:5-6, Is.33:19. This day was coming the fall of Isreal and why and what was going to transpire and not the Gift of the Holy Ghost! You can stand on whatever you want but it doesn't make you correct. Stick with the Scriptures and not your personal reasoning. Show me where Paul says it's okay to Speak in a Tongue or Tongues in the Assembly? Why does Paul say that visitors are going to think that you are mad if it's done by many. Verses 27,28 say Don't! Unless there is an Interpretation. Show me where that this is out of context and my opinion.

​@hargisP2 Hello. You had all this say the other day and now nothing

I don’t often comment on our episodes. I have less time than in the past and back and forth dialogue can be quite time consuming. This post however caught my attention and I am happy to answer it. Thank you for taking the time to post an erudite rejoinder to my segment on Tongues. I appreciate the effort and the attention to detail. That said, I couldn’t disagree more. 1. Your claim - “There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical ‘tongues’”. Paul says otherwise. He describes two administrations of tongues in I Cor. 14. One is privately praying to God so that one’s spirit receives edification and one that is the public gift of tongues that is for the edification of the church. Paul says this in verse 2, “For he that speaketh in an UNKNOWN tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for NO MAN UNDERSTANDETH him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh MYSTERIES.” (Emphasis added for clarity) Mystery is literally the entire point. I disagree that there is nothing mysterious. Mystery is part and parcel of the experience. God designed it that way. To say there is “nothing mysterious about Biblical tongues” is to fly in the face of the great Apostle to the Gentiles. 2. Your claim - “There is only one type” I imagine you know this in I Cor. 12 but it bears repeating. Paul highlights the diversities of administrations within the Spirit. One God dividing His work into multiple administrations. “4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.” One is given the gift of diverse tongues to another the gift of interpretation of those tongues. This gift of tongues must be by two or three at the most and they must be in order. This is the gift of tongues. Those that speak in tongues in Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19 however did not follow this protocol. On the day of Pentecost they were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak in other tongues. At Cornelius house the same happened as it also did at Samaria and at Ephesus. This is not in accordance with the gift of tongues described in I Cor. 12. We know God is not the author of confusion and we know scripture doesn’t contradict itself. To claim these are not two administrations of the same Spirit is to deny the text itself. There are even some rabbinical sources that claim that the High Priest would speak in tongues inside of the Holy of Holies with the Urim and Thummim of Ex. 28:30. These are not charismatic or pentecostal scholars, these are Hebrew midrashic claims. In short, the gift of the Holy Ghost evidenced by speaking in tongues is a different administration of the one Spirit of God. This is born out in both Old Testament and New Testament scripture and in practical experience. Pentecost is sweeping the globe. There are more adherents now than at any other time in history. Overriding the protestations of denominational authorities who claim it is impossible, it is nonsense, it is a xenoglossic , self produced phenomenon (which you seem to disavow), etc. 3. Your claim - “The Holy Spirit gave the 12 (yep, 12, not 120, but that’s a story for another day) apostles…” The idea that only the twelve did so is without merit in that “cloven tongues like as of fire sat upon each of them…”. Now, I can quote Oneness scholars on this as the sources are abundant, but even those outside our ranks recognize that all 120 received this supernatural gift. Ellicott -“We must not think of the gift as confined to the Apostles. The context shows that the writer speaks of all who were assembled, not excepting the women, as sharers in it. (Comp. Acts 2:17-18.)” Benson - “Acts 2:4. They were all filled with the Holy Ghost - That is, all the one hundred and twenty, as appears from Acts 2:1.” Gill - “Not only the twelve apostles, but the seventy disciples; and it may be all the hundred and twenty, that were together, even women as well as men: Acts 2:17.” To quote just a few, all 120 received the Holy Ghost in this manner. Peter even states that this is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy “In the last days I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.” This would be given to the SONS, DAUGHTERS, YOUNG MEN, OLD MEN, SERVANTS AND HANDMAIDS. (Emphasis added) This corresponded to all those that gathered and subsequently to the 3000 that would receive it later in the day. I disagree strongly on this point (along with most scholars) that this was restricted to the twelve apostles. 4. Your claim - “And, no, "speaking in tongues" is nowhere to be found in the OT. The oft quoted passage from Isaiah refers specifically to the Assyrian language.” Again, Paul expressly states that Isaiah 28 is absolutely part of the New Testament act of speaking in tongues. “21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.” (I Cor. 14:21). Paul certainly links Isaiah 28 with the New Testament administration of speaking with other tongues. There is no doubt that there was an immediate application concerning Assyria. There is also no doubt that Paul sees it as having another, greater application in the New Testament or else he would not have referenced it. If you are able to speak learnedly concerning linguistics surely you are acquainted with the Law of Double Reference? That a prophecy is fulfilled in the moment and also will be fulfilled on a cosmic scale in greater scope in the ages to come i.e. the “seed” that would inherit all things Isaac/Jesus, the Davidic Kingdom fulfilled in David immediately and in Christ eschatologically, etc. ? Isaiah 28 is a classic example of the Law of Double Reference and I am a bit surprised you limit its scope to an Old Testament event when Paul takes care to extrapolate from that setting into the New Testament for us. Here is a quote from Barnes, “(1) It was predicted in the Old Testament that what is here stated would occur in the times of the Messiah. Thus, in Isaiah 28:11, "With ...another tongue will he speak unto this people." Compare 1 Corinthians 14:21 where this passage is expressly applied to the power of speaking foreign languages under the gospel.” Again, this is not a Oneness scholar. Most of Christendom knows Isaiah 28 has a greater New Testament underpinning. These are just four examples highlighting our theological differences. There are more but these were the most glaring. I can speak to you from a position of respectful scholarly dispute, but I can also speak from my own personal experience. My great grandfather was converted because he heard his native tongue of Aramaic being spoken by an American woman in a prayer meeting in Chicago. I have personally heard a 10 year old Spanish girl in Honduras in the mountain village of La Colonia Sandy Bay speak in fluent English without knowing it in later conversation. These are striking examples of people speaking in a known language without natural understanding. Those that speak in tongues today are simply continuing what happened on the Day of Pentecost and that which Isaiah, Joel, Zephaniah and even Moses said would come.

@@pastorurshan PART 1 - _1. Your claim - “There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical ‘tongues’”._ 1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps *the* quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible. The whole passage is talking about real, rational language. Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything *but* English is pretty slim to nil. If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one _there_ will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at _that particular service._ In this sense, therefore, I am speaking _only to God,_ since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined further below), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” - i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me. An idiomatic expression to say that no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language. When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying. There is _nothing_ in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even _remotely_ suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the _listeners_ who do not understand, *not* the speaker - no matter how hard modern tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….unless the author of the text is a bad grammarian, it just isn’t there. “Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. _2. Your claim - “There is only one type”_ 1 Cor. 12 - many gifts, one Spirit - In this section Paul sort of hammers home the concept of a singular deity. Most pre-Christian religions (including, of course, that of the Greeks), consisted of a pantheon of deities; oftentimes, major and minor. Typically, each deity was responsible for a specific thing/concept. In the Germanic tradition, one would not pray to Tyr for advice/petitions concerning fertility; one prayed to Freja. Similarly, for matters of war, one prayed to Tyr, etc. Since Paul speaks of several gifts, it would have been natural for Greeks (as well as many other religious cultures represented by Corinth’s multi-cultural make-up) to associate each gift with a specific deity. Paul is just illustrating here that though there are multiple gifts, in Christianity, they all come from, and are bestowed by, one-in-the-same deity; not several. With respect to the phrases “divers kinds of tongues” and “diversities of tongues” (1 Cor. 12:10 and 28), one needs to look at what was actually written. First, in v. 10, there is no “various” or “different” here; the passage from the Greek is literally “to another, kinds of languages”. Verse 28 is more straightforward; “kinds of languages”. What is pertinent is that Paul renders ‘kinds’ with the word “genos”. It’s the same root as in our English ‘genus, genetics, genealogy’. It refers specifically to ‘kind(s)’ in the sense of belonging to a ‘family’, ‘race’, ‘people’. A more accurate understanding of “kinds of languages” would be “kinds of languages [belonging to a language family]”. A clear indication that real, rational languages are being referred to here. Paul’s prohibition about the number of foreign language speakers in a public worship goes with not forbidding languages (“tongues”) - More to the point, he is not forbidding someone at a public worship from praying aloud even though no one else understands a word they’re listening to (ties back to v.2). Better for the person to worship God in a language no one else can understand and thus not benefit from (recall that throughout his letter Paul calls for clarity and understanding at a public worship so that all may benefit, not just the one) than to not pray/worship at all. He does, however, set some ground rules for when this happens by limiting the number of speakers to 2-3. Again, he’s not speaking about, nor is he advocating here for, modern tongues-speech. With respect to Peter with Cornelius and Paul in Ephesus and things being the same as on Pentecost - A Roman soldier’s “household” typically consisted of his immediate family, a retinue of fellow soldiers, and numerous slaves. His relatives, like Cornelius, would have presumably spoken Latin. Educated Romans would have also spoken Greek over Latin. Fellow soldiers also spoke Latin, but as Roman soldiers they could have come from just about anywhere in the Empire. Likewise, and especially, his slaves. For these latter two groups, Latin and Greek would have likely been second/third languages. In short, though his fellow soldiers, and his slaves, spoke Latin, it may not at all have been their native language(s). His slaves almost certainly not. Like the soldiers, their native language(s) could have come from anywhere in the Roman Empire. In Cornelius’ household, we have several people who comprised a multi-lingual group. We must also surmise that most of this company also spoke Greek in varying degrees. From the narrative, we know that the incident is reported from the perspective of Peter and his group, and “They (Peter and his company) heard them speaking in languages (“tongues”) and praising God”. From this, we can deduce two types of speech here: (1) speech that Peter and his group understood, and (2) speech they did not understand. Considering Peter and his company report in the narrative that they knew that some of what was said were praises to God, it must have been said in a language they knew (likely Greek, but possibly some recognized Latin). Some of what was said however, they did not understand because it was foreign to them. Peter and his company did not speak, nor apparently recognize, those languages. When a bi-lingual or multi-lingual speaker utters something suddenly/spur of the moment in an emotional outburst (not to be taken with any negative connotations), the speaker will _always_ revert to their native language. That’s just a known fact. These people here were in the same situation and reverted to languages Peter and his company did not speak. Hence, as far as Peter and his company were concerned, they began “speaking in tongues (read “languages”)”. The reference to the situation being just as it was on Pentecost is a reference to the _manner_ in which they were speaking (i.e. declaring the mighty works of God in a “bold and authoritative manner”), just as the apostles did on Pentecost - it has nothing to do with what language they were speaking, but rather the _manner_ in which they were speaking, that was the same as on Pentecost. No modern tongues-speech here; just unrecognized real languages. Paul in Ephesus - Like Corinth, Ephesus was a cultural melting pot. It was also on a seaport and boasted what we might call today a “tourist attraction”; one of the seven wonders of the ancient world - the temple of Artemis. It’s quite possible, and given what happened based on the narrative, quite probable, that these individuals Paul met were not native Ephesians; thus, not native speakers of Greek. Again, there are two types of speech referenced here: one that Paul understood, and one he did not. We are not told what the native language of Paul’s new friends was. It appears however, that both these people and Paul conversed in the ‘common tongue’ of the day: Greek; a language Paul understood. When Paul baptized them, they may have simply been, out of joy of receiving the Holy Spirit one may assume, expressing themselves in their native language; one that Paul was obviously not familiar with. The fact that they began speaking in a language unknown to Paul, further lends to the idea that these believers were not native Ephesians. No modern tongues-speech, just the unnamed native language of these disciples. The midrash’s reference to the ‘language of God’ is not an allusion to ‘tongues-speech’ - it’s a reference to Hebrew, the sacerdotal language of Judaism, which was giving way to vernaculars.

@@pastorurshan PART 2 - _3. Your claim - “The Holy Spirit gave the 12 (yep, 12, not 120, but that’s a story for another day) apostles…”_ It was only the 12 who received the Holy Spirit; not 120. The 120 were gathered when Matthias was chosen to replace Judas; thus, the apostles were again all of “one accord” - that phrase refers to the 12. In other words, Acts 1 closes with the new addition of Matthias. The apostles are back to their complete 12. The “they” Acts 2 opens with (verse one), is referring to the 12; they were all of one accord and in one place, i.e., the 12 apostles. The earlier part of Acts 1 references Jesus telling the apostles that they will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. That is, the 12 apostles; not 108 other people as well. Those that spoke were all Galileans, a direct reference to the 12 apostles. In addition, when Peter stood and addressed the crowd, he stood together with the 11, not the 119. Lastly, the day that the 120 or so met to elect Matthias is not at all the same day as the Pentecost. That’s made clear in Acts 2. 120 may have been gathered to elect Matthias, but on a different day, only the 12 were gathered and received the Holy Spirit. There were about 10 days between the time of the Ascension and the day of Pentecost. Pentecost occurring 50 days after Passover and Jesus ascending on the 40th day. It was during this time that the apostles gathered together with the others to select the 12th apostle. After this was done, there was still time left, during the ten days, until the actual day of Pentecost. This is the reason for the first verse of Acts 2 being worded as it is:‘ And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all together in one place.” The “they” here is the 12. One has to accept that, in order to assert that the day of Pentecost demonstrates 120 disciples initially received the Holy Spirit, that the Holy Spirit (if one subscribes to Biblical text as being the inspired word of God) and “Luke” the author, are bad grammarians. The antecedent of ησαν (they were) is Matthias and the eleven. God's grammar is perfect. If you decide that "they were" is not referring to the previous verse, how far are you going to travel back up the text to connect it? You could even go all the way up to the two men in white robes in verse 11, or the group listed in verse 13 which is a smaller subset of the 120, just the eleven and the women. Would God really leave us with such a conundrum grammatically speaking? If he would do this, then how many other clear passages are we going to reconnect? Why would God be so arbitrary and unclear? _4. Your claim - “And, no, "speaking in tongues" is nowhere to be found in the OT. The oft quoted passage from Isaiah refers specifically to the Assyrian language.”_ Again - Seeing the Jews will not hear God speaking by his prophets and ministers, in their own language, they will now hear their enemies speaking to them in a strange language. He will teach them in a manner that will be much more humiliating; he would make use of the barbarous language of foreigners (Assyrian) to bring them to the true knowledge of God. They are now in a distant land, and there, in hearing a strange speech, in living long among foreigners, they should learn the lesson which they refused to do when addressed by the prophets in their own land. The connection to Pentecost is that people will start to teach and spread the word of God in “foreign” languages - languages other than the sacerdotal language of Judaism, Hebrew. This necessity was completely done away with at Pentecost. Jewish religious custom and tradition demanded that any teaching, praying, reading, prophesying, etc. done from the temple (where the apostles were) be rendered _first_ in Hebrew, then followed by a translation into the vernacular. There even existed an ecclesiastical office for the individuals who did these translations (called the ‘mertugem’). On Pentecost, the apostles broke this tradition and “began to speak in ‘other’ (i.e. _other_ than Hebrew) languages (Aramaic and Greek), as the Holy Spirit kept giving a bold, authoritative, inspired manner of speaking to them. The apostles, by help and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did away with this cultural and religious tradition, and addressed the crowd in Greek and Aramaic; the mother tongue of the attendees, instead of the culturally and religiously correct, and expected tradition of Hebrew first, then translations into the vernaculars. Hebrew was to be exclusively used during “the declaration of first fruits,” which was the sacred liturgy associated with the festival of Shavuot, or Pentecost. In other words, during this particular festival, the crowds would have expected religious services presented in the holy tongue of Hebrew. But what they ended up hearing were powerful messages in “other tongues.” This is why it was addressed/referenced again in Acts - people were going to be taught, going to worship and pray, prophesy, etc. in languages other than Hebrew. “With other languages he will speak to his people”. It’s in no way al allusion to tongues-speech. With respect to tongues as xenoglossy - There are (unfortunately) absolutely no documented cases of xenoglossy - anywhere. Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of examples of tongues-speech have been studied. Not one was ever found to be a real rational language, living or dead. Despite this, the tongues-speaking community is rife with such examples. The frequency that they are reported suggests that tongues as xenoglossy is relatively common. The above aside, given the amount of allegedly attested examples of xenoglossy reported by Pentecostal/Charismatic Christians, if one were to apply this attestation to even a relatively small sampling of say 2,000 glossic utterances, it is more than reasonable to conclude that at minimum, a phenomenally conservative estimate would suggest that at least 10 of these samples would yield a real, rational language. As stated above, this has never happened; not even once. Unfortunately, however, virtually every attested example by the tongues-speaking community seems to be anecdotal at best. The quintessential example circulating several years ago was tongues exhibiting as Hebrew or Aramaic. It got to the point where it was almost cliché and reached virtual urban legend status. Any pastor worth their salt had to have such a story in their repertoire. And, of course, let’s not forget that there was always this one lone Jewish guy in a room full of Pentecostal/Charismatic Christians who just happened to be fluent in Hebrew or knew Aramaic - that alone begs a slew of questions and raises multiple red flags. I have to almost automatically dismiss ‘tongues’ coming out as English - in Honduras, for example, most schools are bilingual - kids are taught in both English and Spanish as they are expected to know at least some English. In most countries it’s a required language and it’s just too common a language - it’s literally everywhere.

❤❤

Sir, you wrote so much of what you don't really understand nor believe. The Holy Ghost is God speaking through us. If he chooses to make the language as you day, yes the bible says they spoke in OTHER tongues AS the Spirit gave UTTERANCE. " UTTER".. Acts 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

You spelled "scripturally accurate and totally biblical" incorrectly. 🙂

You must have been with the disciples in the upper room to know how the tongues today are not the same. That would make you well over two thousand years old.

@@hargisP2 The Bible is pretty specific as to what they were and what the Holy Spirit gave the 12 at Pentecost.

The Bible doesn’t describe how the tongues sounded, only that there were different languages. You think your opinion is more truthful than the word of God. Your comments to me are ineffective. I have a problem of always checking things out Biblically, prayerfully, seeking God’s answer, and going to the very people accused by others. There is always an agenda when someone so vehemently attacks someone else. I researched History from historians on the matters, I attended the Church services of the Oneness Apostolic Church, and found that everything that others were saying was a flat out lie. I found in written history by men that don’t have a dog in the fight verify What they teach about the first Church and The Doctrine of God is true. That the trinity was brought in the church long after the Apostles had died, and was forced by a pagan ruler to be orthodox in order to have peace. Once people tell lies unknowingly or not, they are not to be trusted on anything they say. Because every comment will be to support the first lie.

By the way there was more than 12

Not all other gifts are given to everyone. You are accusing the Holy Ghost of being not from God. That is blaspheming the Holy Ghost, which you did not discern. Your misunderstanding of scripture is not having the gift of discernment. Your anger against the gifts of the Holy Ghost is in line with the adversary. Matthew 12:22-31 KJVS Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. [23] And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? [24] But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. [25] And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: [26] And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? [27] And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. [28] But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. [29] Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. [30] He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. [31] Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. You are a Pharisee. Unbelief is your problem. Your discernment has misled you. Ever consider that the devil is leading away from the gifts of the Holy Ghost because he knows that is the power that gives the believer the ability to overcome? How is discernment that goes against God’s word not from the evil one?

@@hargisP2 Nobody is talking about the ability to overcome except you. Believers have the ability to overcome though Christ who strengthens us. I’m not talking about the ability to overcome. I’m talking about the ability to raise the dead, speak in different languages, heal the sick, drink any poison, handle snakes. You give a Bible verse of a conversation between Jesus and the Pharisee. Jesus was speaking first of all, to the Pharisee, not “you” speaking to “me”. Jesus has all power, and Glory, you do not. That’s what you don’t realize and can not come to grips with. You are not a god. My belief begins and ends in Christ, the author and finisher of my faith. My belief is not in man. Yours may be, but not mine. Blasphemy is for the sinner. Not for the believers. Romans 8:1-2. You do not study the Bible apparently, because you take the scripture out of context. You read the Bible as if you are God. “ If Jesus can do it, so can I”. That is delusional. So again, study the Bible, stop taking it out of context, stop reading the Bible as if you are the main character. You are not. You call me a Pharisee because I do not believe in you. Give me a break. You are the fool who believes in only yourself. Jesus proved over and over again He is who he says He is. You, on the other hand have proven nothing but a clear misunderstanding of the true nature of your sins, the lack of knowledge and wisdom. Whether it be by choice or ignorance, you lack, do not possess, and can not perform the gifts of the true and only Apostles of the Bible. That does not make Jesus less than what He says He is, it just makes you less than what you think you are. Humble yourself, and if you can not, like I wrote, that you did not acknowledge, go. Go and raise the dead, heal the sick, what are you waiting for. You call me a Pharisee because I’ve called you out and don’t believe you. That is not blaspheming. You can’t take the fact that you are merely a servant of the Lord and should be thankful you have been called, but you are not a god yourself. What are you scared of? Go and watch a video or listen to a sermon that disagrees with you. I’ve watched thousands that agree with you. I’ve watched thousands of videos that claim to prove the gifts of the Apostles are for today. I’ve also listened to Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyers, Steven Fyrdik. (However he spells it) Bill Johnson, and many, many others who say “ you are gods “. I’ve heard Steven say “I AM GOD!” So, don’t hand me a scripture to read that you’ve taken out of context to prove anything to me. I won’t call it blasphemy, but I will call it ignorant. I would at this time call attention to a scripture written by the Apostle Paul, but you guys ignore the inspired word of God written by him. So, best to you and yours. I won’t comment back to you, you’ve proven you lack everything to have a conversation concerning anything about the Bible. I will not apologize for believing in God, that Christ is my Lord and Savior, and not believing in you.

Alan, why do you insist on making the same comment every time? How many times does someone have to argue with you? Don’t you see that the earth itself has already experienced a water baptism? The Bible says that it repented God that he had made man, and then he buried the earth in water. When he returns the second time, he will make a new Heaven and new earth. How? “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” ‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3‬:‭10‬ ‭KJV‬‬ Water baptism washed away the evil the first time, and then fire baptism will purify the earth for the last time. The tabernacle of the Old Testament had an altar (repentance), followed by water, and then the next place was the menorah. The doorposts had to be struck three times with the blood of the Passover lamb. This is representative of the witness of the Spirit, the water, and the blood in 1 John 5. You believe that you can be saved without the Holy Ghost. That’s not Biblical, Alan. I pray that you see how much God loves you and wants you to be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

@@daltonjames8466 Very well said. II Timothy 2:25

Jesus Loves you !!! It is not by coincidence that you were led to the Bible study !!!

@@Robertsrex941 God led me to tge video to show how unsaved the Oneness people are.

@@daltonjames8466 you Oneness people love twisting the scriptures and making things up, things that oppose the Bible. Nowhere does the Biblical Greek say water baptism saves, remits sins, washes sins away, regenerates, justifies, puts people into the body of Christ or is needed for salvation. The translators have misled Biblically ignorant people with scriptures on baptism. Why don't your leaders see what the Biblical Greek says instead of deceiving you.