8 Important Series to read on Narrow is the Way!


A few of you here are new. You’ll notice I sometimes use an odd structuring of English when I speak. Kind of a throwback to growing up in New England, and also a throwback to growing up speaking Yiddish. Mostly that. A Little.

Anyway, many of you who are new aren’t familiar with some of my earlier articles. I thought I’d give a list to the ones I thought were the most important.

  1. Evolution. My series on Evolution was the liveliest one I ever did. Atheists flocked to it, and we actually had some good exchanges. One thing I found in this series was many Atheists don’t like being called atheists, they prefer agnostic. I told them over and over again their definition of their beliefs was not agnostic, and they’d get upset. But it was a surprisingly respectful conversation with many of them. A couple of really insulting and aggressive ones popped in, but for the most part, really good responses. I was proud of this series, because I really hammered Evolution in many ways, including ways most other people have never brought up. I don’t think anyone else really ever dealt with the Warm Little Pond theory before I did, and I destroyed that one. I actually visited a link back someone placed on an article in this series, and it was an atheist telling others to go read my description of Hell “if they could take it”, so they could know what Christians really believe. To know my less than vivid descriptions of Hell were having an effect on Atheists means a lot – I pray the Lord some of these smart and yes, sometimes very funny men get saved. Atomic Mutant, still praying for ya, buddy!

  2. Jehovah’s Witnesses
    . This one I was REALLY proud of. I love how it turned out. I had a few nasty comments, including some from a Christadelphian who was incensed that I called Russell a Seventh Day Adventist. I wish I’d had Evernote back then, because I found an official SDA webpage where they’d admitted they consider Charles T Russell to be a Seventh Day Adventist, which was why I put the comment up. Once my article hit the web, suddenly that SDA page was edited to remove the admission. But on the whole, I dealt with every aspect of their theology and debunked it. For over two years, someone was coming back every day and re-reading the articles. Then suddenly three or four a day. I only hope I  meet just one person, just one in Heaven, who says “I left the Watchtower Society because of your blog.” Everything will be worth it to hear that.
  3. Roman Catholicism. This one produced a lot of hate. Funny how I’m Catholic bashing, but they’re not Baptist Bashing. And one of them responded in anger how offended he was that I claimed to be Jewish. So I answered him with some Yiddish, and he was perplexed. I guess his assumption was that if he was a catholic, he was a Jew. Mine is the only series I’ve ever seen where anyone dealt with the Magisterium first. A Catholic apologist once left a comment on my web site he wanted to see someone answer Rome without using the “same old defeated arguments”. I reposted the entire series and he said not a word. One that gave me the most trouble was so nice – but to no avail. He simply would not listen to reason, and I cut the whole exchange off.
  4. Word Faith/Charismatic. Surprisingly, this still remains one of the top draw items to my blog – not the entire series, just article #10, where I present a timeline people can download. Despite EVERYTHING I wrote in this series, a Charismatic came on to the blog and proceeded to tell me I was studying the Bible too much, and needed to let go, let this be my moment of desperation, my moment of expectation, and I would begin speaking in tongues… needless to say, after a couple of exchanges, she left, and I still don’t speak in tongues.
  5. Church Planting. I sincerely hope that since bloggers consider this kind of in depth series an “evergreen” article, that someone out there uses it to start a church plant. I got right into naming the church, starting it, materials, church covenant, statement of faith and by-laws, etc. If you feel called to the ministry, here you go – I’ve done EVERYTHING for you!
  6. Messianic Judaism – the series that started a thousand angry responses… on other websites. To my knowledge, I’m one of the only blogs ever to take on Messianic Judaism. There’s another I’ve seen, but as far as I know.. That’s it. Everyone else is just content to sit back and let them lead people astray with nary a comment. Read this, borrow the principles I’m using, and write your own articles on why Messianic Judaism is heresy. Most of the responses I got was people on their own websites challenging me to debates, resorting to straw man arguments, then knocking those down. In reality, my arguments were on my website, and.. They never addressed the points I raised, merely repeating their own flawed and overly circular reasoning. This one I may end up re-doing!
  7. Textual Criticism series. Good series. I made a number of people angry with this one, though, and it eventually led to my decision to stop allowing comments.
  8. Seventh Day Adventist series. Also very good. I was happy with this one, but got nary a comment except from an Adventist over 18 months later, who wouldn’t admit he was an Adventist – which of course a quick internet search revealed the fact that not only was he SDA, but his family heralded back to those who knew Ellen G. White. His technique was the tried and true method of repeat yourself until we both get annoyed and you leave. I put the entire comment exchange online.

One series I wasn’t happy with was the Mormonism series. It was correctly deduced by one Mormon that I had never read the book of Mormon. However, I just don’t have the time to engage in a lengthy study of the BoM, PGP and D&C to refute them – so this series never really lived up to its potential (I should mention that it was enthusiastically received by other Mormon apologetic sites at the time). It will have to wait until I retire to fully deal with this series.

Advertisements

No Understanding


No UnderstandingYou know, I’ve got a sizable collection of Christian books on my hard drive. I’ve got copies of many, many books, articles, collections of quotes.
In that collection is countless hundreds of books written by Charismatics and Pentecostals.

Reading them is sometimes an astonishment. How can you be so utterly without understanding? Is my question time and time and time again.

Ezekiel 43 is not a chapter against Denominationalism.

Really.

I promise you.

Clayt Sonmore in his book “Beyond Pentecost” references this chapter several times in this book. He also feels a need to insert his allegorical explanations in brackets in the midst of the verses.

You know, it’s really very simple.

Just print in your chapter the quotation from Ezekiel, and write your bit. If the people are saved, they’ll understand it.

Ezekiel’s day featured a large majority of Jewish people living in two warring kingdoms of Judah and Israel. The Jewish people at that time were involved in paganism and the mystery religions.

That’s what it’s talking about.

11. And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, show them the form of the house [how God joins his true people together] and the fashion thereof [God’s purpose for mankind], and the goings out thereof,and the comings in thereof [the true liberty and freedom of being dead to self and alive in Christ], and all the forms thereof [everything that has to be dealt with in us so that we can truly be free in Christ], and all the ordinances thereof [God’s way of doing things], and all the forms thereof [all the aspects of walking in the glorious inheritance of the sons of God],- and all the laws thereof [the law of the Spirit of life (Romans 8:2) the law of liberty (James 1:25;2:12)]: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof [that they may pattern themselves after Jesus Christ], and all the ordinances thereof [that they may learn His ways], and do them (Ezekiel 43:6-11).

Sonmore, Clayt. 1964. Beyond Pentecost. 2nd.Ed. Pg. 71 THY KINGDOM COME MINISTRIES Clayt Sonmore 12100 Marion Lane – Suite 6104 Minnetonka, Minnesota, USA 55305.

A cursory reading of this will show you Mr. Sonmore’s exposition is beyond faulty – it’s without any understanding whatsoever. It’s been 23 years since I attended a Pentecostal church, and this explains why the “pastor” spent 45 minutes trying to explain this very chapter, and failing at it utterly. He was plagiarizing Mr. Sonmore. Look, if you have to steal, steal from someone who knows what they’re talking about first!

“And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me. And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, a nd the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places. In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger. Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcases of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever. Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern. And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.” (Ezekiel 43:6–11, KJV)

This is a description of the Millennial Temple, and the people of the Millennium who will live with Jesus Christ in their midst, contrasted with the Northern and Southern kingdoms who were in rebellion against God by worship of Tammuz, and the Queen of Heaven, and Baal.

I literally shortened the quote by Mr. Sonmore, which went on and on and on with the most fanciful allegorical interpretations.

The scary thing is – many Charismatics read this and are impressed. God help us.

The Biggest Dangers to Christianity


No, no fancy shmancy format today. I’m just speaking from my heart.

Photo by Joey Banks on Unsplash

There are several dangers facing Christianity today. I’ve got to say, in every time in history when Christians were in danger, they always got much more dedicated and LIVED for the Lord! Today, not so much.

Today, you run a real risk of being fired and going to jail for your beliefs (California and New York are trying to pass legislature that will put anyone in prison for using “the wrong pronoun” to describe a person).

I’m going to list the dangers facing Christianity not in any particular order, because I just don’t know which is the biggest danger – but it seems to me the dangers from within are the most dangerous.

  1. The Democratic party. I’m aware that most Christians in the United States are Republicans. There are many who are Democrats because they say things like, “Well, my heritage has always voted Democrat.” Well, stop the madness… Democrats are fiercely dedicated to making sure that their agendas are legalized, and any disagreements with the Democratic party are punishable by lengthy jail terms and whopping fines. They want to legalize mind altering drugs and every form of immoral and sinful behavior (trust me, they’re not content with what they’ve got now – they’re going to make participation in immorality MANDATORY), but they want to penalize Christians. For things they don’t penalize other Middle Eastern religions for refusing to do.
  2. Ecumenism. I used to aim the writings of this blog at Evangelicals. I’ve pretty much stopped that, because I became aware a couple of years ago that a). They weren’t listening and b). They weren’t listening. You CANNOT tell an Evangelical that Mormons are not Christians anymore. You can’t. They won’t hear it. They accepted Seventh Day Adventism, Messianics and Roman Catholics as well – and those are not Christian either. Ecumenism – the unBiblical mindset that all churches should work together despite doctrinal stands – threatens Christianity to its core. What are you going to say at the Great White Throne to all those Roman Catholics you befriended and never shared the Gospel with? How does that help them if you don’t witness to them, and just buddy buddy with them – and then you see their terrified faces on the Left on Judgment Day? You know what’s coming – and so do they. You failed to warn them. Evangelical Christianity and Ecumenism has failed Christianity.
  3. Textual Criticism. Do you think this is just a matter of Bible preference? It’s not, and here’s why. Listen to a hundred sermons on SermonAudio, and you’re literally going to hear 99 of them question or deny the word of God. “That’s not in the original Greek manuscripts.” “The Original Greek omits that verse/word/phrase.” “That was added by some pious scribe.” What you’re saying to me is, “I don’t believe the word of God, and I’m going to use textual criticism to justify my unbelief, and whatever agenda I want to push.” And believe you me, they do! If we were more Biblically grounded, Kenneth Copeland would have abandoned the ministry and gone on to cargo piloting as a career. There are many men in stolen pulpits around the world who are not called by God, not gifted by God, and not ordained of God. And they’re going to have to answer to God, the same way that someone who was called of God would. It’s going to be an ugly day for them.
  4. Theological Liberalism. Theological Liberalism is rampant today, far more than during the past. We’re talking the vast majority of pastors in the United Methodist, Lutheran and Presbyterian denominations are all to one extent or another Theological Liberals. The Presbyterians have had to divide time and time again over this issue. My visit to a Pastor’s Conference a few years back showed me the Southern Baptist convention is flooded with them as well. I’m going out on a limb here and say that 89% of Pastors in any denomination are to a greater or lesser degree theological liberals. Today they call this “progressive” – the same code word the Soviet Union used to describe communist propaganda. Odd that it should be the same word. Who’s the most famous theological liberal today? Andy Stanley. Ask him his opinion of the Bible. He doesn’t accept the Bible, because he doesn’t believe in it. People have heard him speak, and were shocked at how he dances around the truth on this issue.
  5. Neo-Barthianism. RAMPANT. Barthianism is rampant. Essentially, it is Theological Liberalism disguised with a whitewash of Post Modernism and a clever shell game of words and definitions. MOST of the materials advocated by Faithlife (the company who produces Logos) absolutely are Neo-Barthian – and the spokesmen and teachers Faithlife hired are all theological liberals or Neo-Barthians as well. To my knowledge, there are NO Fundamentalists working for the greatest Bible software company in the world. I’ve written about Neo-Barthianism, which is essentially the modern rush to follow the writings of a man named Karl Barth, who was a theological liberal who disguised his unbelief by mentally redefining words. Francis Schaeffer was a Barthian at first, but apparently Schaeffer radically changed at the end of his life, and decried Evangelicalism and Theological Liberalism at the end of his life. I lack the time to go over it again, but STAY AWAY from the writings of Karl Barth.
  6. Charismatic/Pentecostalism. Here’s the hugest Trojan Horse out there. Pentecostalism is the results of several untaught men who made huge theological errors – and of the group, all of them were trying to keep up with Frank Sandford, a man who was so deluded he very possibly had a nervous breakdown early in his ministry, and thought he was somehow Elijah the Prophet, King David, and one of the Two Witnesses who was to die in Jerusalem. The poor terrified man thought each time he sailed to Jerusalem he was about to die. He was the first to push Pentecostalism, and it was quickly taken up by Charles Parham (one of Sandford’s Students) and John Dowie (one of Sandford’s rivals, who also thought he was one of the two witnesses to die in Jerusalem – and also thought he was Elijah). This is the roots of Pentecostalism, and it is not creeping into every church today – it IS in every church today! No kidding, in the Southern Baptist church I preached at for a while, I was offered Dodie Osteen’s book and also a book by Joyce Meyers. The Southern Baptist church adopted ten years ago a statement they would no longer oppose “a private prayer language”. The Freewill Baptists are struggling with it right now, and losing that battle as well. If you stop struggling against Pentecostalism and embrace it, sooner or later you embrace Kenneth Copeland and the Charismatic word faith heresy. It’s inevitable. You say your church takes a firm stand against speaking in tongues? You’re already losing the battle against this stuff if you adopt any of the Vacation Bible School stuff sold by Lifeway. I literally heard code words for Word Faith disguised in the song lyrics, and nobody was checking this stuff. You are against it, but thanks to the VBS materials, your kids are already indoctrinated, and your church has lost the battle.

When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8b, KJV)

8 Reasons Speaking in Tongues is Not Biblical


Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

This is a debate that’s been raging for over a hundred years. It has been answered time and time again – and it’s still raging today. Roughly, this among Christians is the equivalent of asking Mom, being told no, deciding you don’t like the answer, so you ask Dad.

Here’s the answers… and those who don’t like the answers they’ve heard before won’t like THESE answers!

But I guarantee they’re Biblical!

Reason 1 – limited Biblical usage

“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” (Acts 2:4, KJV)

“While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.” (Acts 10:44–48, KJV)

“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” (Acts 19:5–6, KJV)

These are the only 3 examples In the Bible of anyone speaking in tongues. That’s it. Years ago, when I thought I was saved, my pastor at a Word-Faith church told us that “speaking in tongues is all through the Bible!” He then read these three examples. He never told us these were the only three examples of anyone speaking in tongues

The actual reason tongues were spoken was this – in Acts 2, as a sign of judgment and to authenticate that what the Apostles preached was of God. The second was to show Gentiles could be saved. The third and last time, was to show that Paul was an apostle.

Reason 2 – Early date of Corinthians
Since speaking in tongues is only mentioned in Acts and in Corinthians, we need to look at when Corinthians was written. 1 Corinthians was written AD 55. Several epistles are written before this – none mention tongues. Several epistles are written after this – none mention tongues.
1 Corinthians was not written to the perfect church – it was clearly written to correct doctrinal errors in how Corinthian Christians were practicing their faith. Paul clearly is taking them to task, and in 2 Corinthians, he starts the epistle by telling everyone up front what essentially is “I’m not going to chew you out like last time.”

Corinthians was written in AD 55. Acts was written about AD 65. Tongues in Acts are shown as being spoken in the past tense. There’s no mention of tongues except for these two books. By the books written in AD 60, Paul was unable to heal other believers. The sign gifts were passing by AD 60. Tongues, Healing and discernment had passed, and prophecy was the last to go, according to what is written in Acts. There’s no mention of tongues after AD 60 or so. Early Christian authors recorded in the second century (160 AD) that they had no idea what tongues were, because it had already passed.

Reason 3 – lack of mention of tongues

If Tongues were a major doctrine as Charismatics make it, then here’s the simple fact – it would have been mentioned more. If it truly gave you more insight into God than the Bible, then Scripture would have enjoined speaking in tongues. We would not have the Bible described as perfect (Psalm 19:7, 1 Corinthians 13:10), but rather speaking in tongues.

Reason 4 – First usage of tongues

“By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” (Genesis 10:5, KJV)

“Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.” (Acts 2:6–11, KJV)

Tongues and Languages are used interchangeably in the Bible. The process of speaking in an unknown tongue – what we call glossolalia – was a pagan practice that Paul was trying to rebuke gently. The Bible made it clear that the speaking of tongues was always in a language that the hearers understood.

Reason 5 – no presence of unbelieving Jews.
What’s the entire purpose of speaking in tongues? To pray to God in a language you don’t understand, right? Actually, that’s incorrect. Paul says that’s unfruitful. Okay, so there’s the reason my former word of faith pastor used to say, we pray in the tongues of angels so that Satan won’t understand, right? No, because Satan is an angel, and if that’s the language of angels, then he’s understanding perfectly well what you’re saying! You’d do better to pray in English if that’s your motivation!

The Bible tells us that the reason we spake in tongues was as a sign to unbelieving Israel.When the Apostles spoke in tongues in Acts 2, it was the fulfillment of prophecy. It had been prophesied that when Israel heard people in their midst speaking in foreign tongues, it was a sign of judgment. What’s the judgment? They’d rejected their messiah.
Tongues are for a sign. Jews require a sign, according to the New Testament. No kidding, even though I’m a man of faith, I STILL require a sign! I find myself praying to the Lord daily and asking forgiveness for the fact that I seem to be genetically disposed to needing signs to guide me.
So when Kenneth Hagin and Kenneth Copeland on TV were speaking in tongues, where was the unbelieving Jews in their midst?

Reason 6- tongues will cease.
This is the biggie. The Bible says that when that which is perfect is come, tongues will cease. What’s perfect? The Bible. No kidding. The Bible is described in the Bible as being perfect, and that God holds it above His own name, that we are to desire it above our necessary food. Jesus Christ constantly referred to it, and even rebuked the Pharisees for not knowing it!

The Bible was completed in AD 90-95 or so. By AD 60, only a few years after 1 Corinthians was written, Paul was unable to heal other believers. So tongues existed only for a very short period of time along with the other sign gifts, and passed away. In books written after 56 AD, there is no more mention of tongues.

Reason 7 – tongues are a sign for unbelievers
The Bible says so. So – if you’re speaking in a nonsense tongue, how is that a sign to unbelievers? All they’re going to think is that you need very powerful medication.

Reason 8 – The first supposed speaking in tongues
It’s recorded that at the beginning of the 20th century, that Agnes Ozman was the first person to speak in tongues in a room full of Gentile men, after a whole night of people vainly trying to speak in tongues. She suddenly got “the gift”, and began to spake in tongues as she was given utterance.

Her words were recorded. “Eeny Meeny Miney mo.” No, I’m not kidding. The sentence that followed shed light on the whole thing…” Leezle layzle lazzle lozel.”

People, that’s not speaking in tongues. One man packed up and left that day, telling them “This is not of God. This is madness.” He was right.

Conclusion

What is being done today is not speaking in tongues. It is practiced by shamans, witches, Hindu’s, Buddhists, and many other pagan religions. Speaking in tongues was always in the tongues of men, and always spoken when the person could understand it, it was done one at a time, and Jews were always present. How many Jews attend your charismatic church? If they are believing Jews, then what is being authenticated? If tongues are for EVERYONE – and the Bible says otherwise – then what is being authenticated? What is being proved? Tongues are for UNBELIEVERS.
Not believers.

Signs of the Times


Evangelicals have begun to oppose the Bible.

Evangelicals have begun to link arms with the unsaved.

Evangelicals are beginning to reject Fundamentalists, in favor of the unSaved, such as those who sprinkle babies and call it salvation. Such as Mormons. Such as Catholics.

We hear that over a billion people are Christians, and we assume that means people who understant “ye must be born again”.

While in Seminary, my teacher asked the rhetorical question of how many people were saved? He guessed 5%, and everyone in the class was scandalized.

I took the Operation World manual, and took their statistics. It was very simple. I took out all the denominations that assume you are predestined to be saved. Why? Because by the second generation, they are relying on their infant baptism as a sign of their “election”.

I took out all the Protestant denominations that believe that being baptized saves you.

I took out the Mormons.

I took out the Roman Catholics.

It left Charismatics and Baptists. I didn’t take out any of those numbers, because I was estimating a “fudge factor” of, “Some of those Protestants must have gotten saved despite their denominations’ stand”.

I ended up with 1.67%, if I recall correctly.

Right around 85 million people.

I did the statistics in reverse, and ended up with the same number. And now I’m thinking I was optimistic.

With that in mind, let’s look at the problem – Evangelicals prefer the company of all those people the Bible rules out as being saved.

15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2:15 (KJV)

1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 1 John 3:1 (KJV)

19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. John 15:19 (KJV)

The last verse is the bottom line. If you’re an Evangelical Christian, and you reject Fundamentalist as “pharisees”, and use phrases like “I don’t view the Bible as the fourth member of the Trinity”…

The Bible is saying you many not be saved.

Just saying.

A Biblical Examination of Pentecostalism #5


Last one for now! I’ll sneak some in later when nobody expects it.

Something I remember someone saying when I was attending a Messianic Synagogue (in the days before I was saved…)…

“Why have scientists never analyzed tongue speaking?”

Here’s the answer, some 20 years later: They have analyzed it many times. Each time they have disproved it.

Tongues. Technically known as Glossolalia.

Here’s an encounter I had with a co-worker, which I wrote about a few years ago.

Incidentally, someone at work wanted to argue with me. He brought up a radio show he’d heard about two Baptist pastors claiming we had the Bible all wrong. I’m glad they pointed it out – Godly men have been prayerfully studying the Bible all wrong for 2,000 years until these two jokers came along!

Anyway, the guy at work told me Baptists were wrong, because we don’t believe in speaking in tongues, and these two Baptist pastors were convinced we were wrong.

My response to him was to quote 1 Corinthians 12 – “Tongues will cease.”

He replied, “Well, that’s not for today.”

Wow, really? A Charismatic telling me tongues ceasing were not for today! I told him, “It says until that which is perfect is come. The Bible is described as perfect in the Psalms:

7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. Psalm 19:7 (KJV)

I was really trying to get out of the conversation – this kind of discussion is not permitted at work. But the fellow persisted.

“Well it also says that knowledge will cease. Do you know anything? If you do, then tongues are for today.”

I answered him patiently. “Will you know the Lord after the Millennium?”

He paused. “uhhh…. Yeah.”

“Then obviously we’re not sitting around in the eternity completely oblivious- that would describe death, not life. We’ll know the Lord, we’ll know the Gospel, we’ll know each other… So obviously this is not talking about knowledge as knowledge – this is talking about Word of Knowledge, the supernatural understanding of correct doctrine for the purpose of writing the New Testament – and that’s already written. That also covers the supernatural knowledge Peter showed with Ananias and Saphira.”

“Oh.” He shook his head. “Well, I haven’t studied it out.” That wasn’t quite true – he obviously had studied it to the point he thought he had a zinger that would stump me. That wasn’t the case. So he quickly got out of the conversation. Which was okay by me. If he wants to talk about it after work, excellent! During work… No. My employer does not permit it, and I honor that request.

With the understanding of Genesis, that tongues means languages Biblically, we see that supernatural manifestations of tongues was to speak in a language miraculously you did not know. The New Testament furthermore made the requirement that if you got the urge to suddenly speak in, say, Basque in the service, let the pastor know, and when permitted, speak. The requirement was that someone had to be there who was a native Basque speaker to understand it! This is what it means by “One to interpret”. If you wanted to speak in Basque, and had never learned it… But there was nobody there who spoke Basque… Then you should hold your tongue. God would bring that only if someone was there to interpret. This is a clear teaching of the New Testament.

What are tongues for?

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 1 Corinthians 14:22 (KJV)

This means if you stand up in a Charismatic church and begin speaking in other tongues, you are in effect claiming someone in that church body is not saved. Your speaking in tongues is for them. If they do not speak that language – then you quite simply wasted your time, and it was not of God that you spoke in that tongue.

If it was not of God that you spoke in tongues, then who was it of?

We go to the first verse listed by Charismatics…

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Acts 2:1-11 (KJV)

I’m not trying to paint a Libyan flag with the colors – but I wanted your eyes drawn to the very verses that discuss this. Each of the verses is in a different color to contrast them, and force the modern Bible reader into doing something that was common prior to the 20th century (reading one verse, or one thought at a time.)

I don’t know exactly the number of Pentacostal pastors who teach the two-tongue theory, and how many simply don’t differentiate. I attended a Charismatic church before I was saved (and I’ll be discussing this a lot as we go through this). My former pastor taught there was two different kinds of tongues, “Other tongues” and “unknown tongues”.

He would agree with me that “Speaking in other tongues” was – speaking in a language that you did not know, as supernatually enabled by the Holy Spirit. What he would not agree with me on, is that this gift is passed away, as the Bible said it would.

However, he advocated (consistent with most Pentacostals) that speaking in tongues also included “unknown” tongues, tongues that were not spoken on earth. Another name for this was “the tongues of angels”, speaking in a heavenly tongue.

While these terms are indeed used in the Bible, it is not an interpretation that can clearly be derived rom Scripture from context and usage. Indeed, the only usage of the few verses in the Bibles on this relatively unimportant gift all seem to be referencing the same thing, speaking in a language you don’t know.

I’ll digress briefly by telling you I remember a deacon in one of these churches (a Messianic “synagogue”) complaining why hasn’t anyone ever analyzed speaking in tongues so that it can be proven?

Getting back on topic, here’s the other verses on speaking in tongues. There’s not many.

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. Acts 10:44-48 (KJV)

The last time, they were all Jews who spoke in tongues, in the presence of many unbelieving Jews. It was a sign for the unbelievers that God was with the 11 Apostles, and that truly everything they spoke about the Gospel was of God.

This time, Jews are still present. The people speaking this time are Gentiles. It is a sign that salvation is not limited to Jews. That may sound odd to today’s hearers, but it would have been a truly hot button topic back in those days.

1 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. 7 And all the men were about twelve. Acts 19:1-7 (KJV)

That’s the last verse talking about speaking in tongues in the Bible, except for 1 Corinthians. I’ve already dealt with this one in detail.

Again, the question would be, who is there? All Jewish. This took place in relative proximity to a synagogue, as we see from verse 8:

8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. Acts 19:8 (KJV)

So, who do we have? Disciples of John (all Jewish), Paul… and in relative proximity to unbelieving Jews. Now the “Why” question. Why did they speak in tongues here?

for a sign to unbelieving Jews, and to all others, that God had called Paul to be an apostle. There is no record anywhere else in the Bible of anyone recieving the gift of tongues.

To say they continue today when they do not fit the definition, use, method or practice is inaccurate to say the least.

A Biblical Examination of Pentecostalism #4


One more after this!

Let’s go to Ernest Angely, for his defense of speaking in tongues from the Bible. The chronology is going to raise some eyebrows.

Ten years after Pentecost, the Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Ghost; the Holy Ghost also testified through them when He came in… (Acts 10:44-46). Twenty five years later we find some people receiving the same Holy Ghost in the same way. He took over their vocal organs and spoke in another tongue. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues (Acts 19:6) (https://www.ernestangley.org/tags/tag_entries/tag/Baptism+of+the+Holy+Ghost)

ten years plus twenty five years is thirty five years. I know, math is not my strong suite anymore (I used ta be really good at it) but I’m getting 35 years, even using a slide rule and a scientific calculator.

Acts runs from 30 AD to 60 AD.

I don’t know about you, but Ernest Angely is putting Acts 19 at 65 AD… five years after Acts was written! Acts ends abruptly as Paul is put to death before Luke continues writing. Why didn’t Luke write about Paul’s death? Easy one… the Holy Spirit stopped moving Luke to write after Paul reaches Rome.

Mr. Angely is off by about 9 years, according to Ramsey, and off by about 15 years by some other accounts that puts Paul’s missionary journeys earlier in time. I’ll go by the latter date and give Mr. Angely the benefit of the doubt.

The last Biblically recorded example of speaking in tongues is around 56 AD. After that, it vanishes from the earth.

There is no place in the Bible that tells us the method has been changed… (Ernest Angley)

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 1 Corinthians 13:8 (KJV)

There’s a verse in the Bible saying that tongues would cease. It was written in 55 AD. In 56 AD Paul witnesses to and converts disciples of John, and they speak in tongues. No mention is made of speaking in tongues after this. After 1 Corinthians, there is no tongues speaking in the Bible.

It ceased.