"You anti-pentecostals have a problem with the Holy Spirit of God. It is a serious error to deny the wonderful work of the Holy Spirit in our day."

Christian, I do not want to offend you. I have read your previous posts on the struggles you have faced and am nothing but thankful for your relationship with the Christ Jesus. Do not let us cause a stumbling block in your faith.

I adddress you as a dear brother and only ask that you be careful not to be swept away with this modern movement.

We are called to put on the whole counsel of God. This includes all doctrine, discipline, government and worship founded upon Scripture.

We cannot promote holiness by speaking in unknown tonuges, yet deny basic fundamentals. How can one be defined as holy and pure in Christ's church, but deny the appointed government of Christ's church? How can one promote holiness and purity by speaking in tongues, but deny the proper worship of God in spirit and ***in truth***. Can you really deny the true gospel of justification and salvation in Christ, and yet be considered holy because one speaks in unknown tonuges?

If you have not watched the video clip, I would suggest you do before you are perceived as lending support for this movement. It may not be destroying the churches in Northern Ireland, but this Pentecostal movement is having a very severe and damaging effect on true and faithful Christian churches of old.

Here is the clip again.

http://www.warneveryone.com/dueling_tonguesMed_prog001.swf

Quoting one verse without the context that you mean can give support to evil so that others blindly follow these people's teachings. I hope that was not your intention to support this movement as being holy, faithful and of the Holy Spirit of Christ.

This is what Pentecostalism, the "holy spirit" and holiness movements have brought us from those speaking in "unknown tongues". Just watch this for yourself!

http://www.warneveryone.com/dueling_tonguesMed_prog001.swf

Remember, this is what these people teach with a bible in their hand (without exception) and quoting verses one after another from the Bible.

BEWARE of these people promoting unknown tongues claiming to be filled with the true Holy Spirit of God

I have been reading the posts of Abigail for the past month or so and would ask you to be very careful with her commentary.

She is one of the more misleading and carefully worded posters on the site with an intention to indoctrinate people in the pentecostal, independent, arminian and holiness movement that has flooded the world churches.

Beware of her selective Scripture proof texts as she is a key word searcher, and only uses the immediate context of passages rather than the intended meaning, or literal sense, of the texts. You are not going to find her using the Holy Spirit speaking through Scripture alone as the primary standard, but only the "holy spirit" speaking through her tongue (whatever definition that is has yet to be determined as it cannot be translated by any man) that is the primary standard.

I've read your posts below. Are you sure that you mean what you say in that those books you define as historical in Scripture should not be used to define doctrine. I'm not sure where you learned this, but would be interested to know who preaches or teaches these views.

The Bible teaches that all Scripture, historical or non-historical (I'm not sure what that means by your definition) should be the foundation of doctrine.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2Tim.3:16)

I did a text search for "all" "scripture" and "doctrine" on bible gateway and see that these words cannot be found in the NIV. Then I reduced it to "scripture" and "doctrine" and yet not in the NIV, nor NASB, ASB, YLT, Darby or Amplified versions.

I'm sure you know this, but it would be a good idea to examine Acts as the balance of 1Cor.14 is just being ignored as it does not fit the selective approach to the Scriptures that many apply to support their presuppositions to their sect.

"Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith." (Jer.23:31) - We seem to be seeing a lot of that from these Pentecostal sects in our age.

In context, Acts is very clear on the matter of what tongues were described, and they were known languages, not some unrecognized gibberish that nobody could understand as is implied by this sect.

"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance...

6Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" (Acts.2:4,6-7)

Abigail is very very selective in her reasoning. She writes:

"I am not affiliated with the modern Pentecostal Movement. I know of many of the heresies that are being promoted by the false leaders and teachers—not only in Pentecostal circles but in the churches in general.. The Word of God is truth if every man is a liar."

This is a good approach...deny right up front, then discredit the movement, then disclose that God is truth and every man is a liar...of course, selectively.

She uses the Scriptures similarly and then highlights key points out of context, but selectively rejects the entire context of chapters and books proving the intended true meaning of God's Word.

There is no command, specific example or necessary inference to be drawn from the Scriptures that someone speaking in "unknown tongues" is declared born again or saved. Yet, there is sufficient Scriptural evidence that "unknown tongues" are true languages in this world, and can be interpreted for the edification of the church and its members.

You are great at posting Scripture but unfortunately lack any discernment of same.

If you took as much time reading Scripture rather than posting day after day on this site you might break out of that goofy holiness/pentecostal sect that has captured your mind.

The vial judgments have not yet come, but they don't have anything to do with your opinion that the "**beast is the Antichrist*** that makes war with the saints. The ***false prophet*** institutes the mark of the beast and causes everyone to worship the beast" as you say.

I find it funny that you used Rev. 13 to interpret Rev. 16 when you seem to love to post only a couple verses that suit your epistemology, but ignore the rest of chapters. What's up with the passages I quoted where you ladies should be quiet in the churches as commanded by Paul?

Did you conveniently forget those key passages, or just want to jump into an eschatological discussion to avoid the real topic on Paul's closing command?

"Evil unbelieving humanity denies those words to mean what they state—because they hate God's gifts of the Spirit and the evidence given by God of receiving the Holy Ghost, and hate Jesus' own words, "They shall speak with new tongues"."

Scripture writes:

"For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

I find it amazing the "selective" passages that are used in 1Cor.14 in order to promote the Pentecostal sect, but yet look at the denomination with the most women who reject male Pastors, Ministers and Elders, and yet proclaim themselves with all the prophetical gifts and unknown tongues.

I wanted to say again how well this Pastor laid out his Scriptural argument for the true nature of "unknown tongues" as well as the proper context of Paul's letter to the Corinthian church.

His main point about how Paul is addressing the unity of the church, and that the modern day "holiness" movement and "pentecostal" movement is just the opposite. They cause division, disunity and a great error when teaching that those who do not speak in tongues cannot be saved. Abigail has firmly convinced me in reading her comments on this thread that these people are dangerous, unfaithful to the true gospel, and seeking to divide the church at all costs to promote their teachings.

I've seen this modern movement grow around Africa, North America, Asia and Europe over the years. It has not been until reading Abigail's comments recently and reading the chapter's she is quoting that I can really see the danger in her teachings to the church of Christ. The one line verses she uses out of context are really damaging.

Here is the link again of the sermon you posted and I hope everyone will listen to it before being further deceived by Abigail and her friends here:

Thank you for the excellent example and resource. Few will investigate the matter beyond their own grounded, immovable presuppositions. Dealing with the holiness movements, and Pentecostalism is the most difficult of all the sects. They have many visions and miracles that they are like a ship on the sea without a rudder.

Paul is very clear in the context of the chapter, but these people reject everything that does not fit their visions. He concludes:

"33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, ***let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.***

You wrote:

"Wherefore let him that speaketh in an ** tongue pray that he may interpret. (1Co 14:13)

You don't believe it was literally some "unknown" tongue because you choose not to believe. You choose to follow Reformers that deny the gifts of the Spirit and try to eradicate these verses from the Bible."

Ok if you want to be consistent in your Scripture pasting, please take warning from Paul with this command:

"27If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28But if there be no interpreter, ***let him keep silence in the church;*** and let him speak to himself, and to God."

Please Abigail, will you instruct these ministers and followers of this Pentecostal sect to finish the passages and if there is no interpreter for this gibberish, which you claim is the unknown tongue that nobody knows, to keep silent in the church. I've seen dozens of these people all speaking gibberish out loud and nobody can interpret and nobody can understand.

"Once again you demonstrate your insincerity, Jim. Would you ever say: "What do you expect from a Baptist governor?" Or don't Baptist governors ever do anything wrong?"

The same question could be reversed on you in regard to your love for the Catholic Church.

Do you ever condemn or criticism the Pope or Roman Catholic Church? I'm not talking about backsliding priests, bishops or cardinals, but the current doctrine taught by the Pope's authority, and the Vatican's public testimony.

So many in the Roman Catholic Church are blind followers of her doctrine, discipline, form of government and especially her form of worship. They would never consider the Pope to be the scripturally identified "man of sin" or the Papal government to be the great western Antichrist of Revelation. So, fair enough...she has her own interpretation and Scott Hahn can tell you in so many words using tradition and Scripture, but certainly not Scripture alone as it is forbidden with Rome.

How long have you been in the UK and reading the Directory for Public Worship?

I hope you don't mind if I share my thoughts that may be helpful to you.

Whether one is involved in fornication over male or female images, or acts upon those imaginations, the sin is grevious in the eyes of God.

There is a sufficient level of grace that those who are saved are given to overcome the sin, but sometimes our imaginations lead us into greater temptations to sin, and our lusts burn so greatly that we cannot do anything but fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

Read the context of 1 Corinthians 10 (the immorality and idolatry of the Israelites). Then read the promise found in 1 Corinthians 10:13.

Then read Numbers 25 which is what is being referred to by Paul in v.8.

"Unleavened bread shall be eaten seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters" (Exod.13:7).

Hello my dear friend. Yes, it is me. I'm here on business and will return next week. I've been here a week so far.

Please know that I will be praying for your wife and am so glad to hear your words about God's free grace in her life. We know that God's is the great author of salvation in Christ, and everything else is smoke and mirrors. As you know, we can go blue in the face trying to explain to someone the true gospel of Jesus Christ, but without Christ's free grace given to that sinner to truly understand their sinful nature,
we will fail to persuade.

It is the same with this holiness crowd and tongues. They really believe that in all of Scripture, God is talking about gibberish as an unknown tongue. They seem to teach that everyone in the old and new testament walked around speaking gibberish as an unknown tongue, and it has nothing to do with languages.

You wrote:

"Paul is stating that a person that speaks in an unknown tongue should pray to interpret the tongue. If the tongue were not unknown, there would be for need of interpretation. Paul is not stating that tongues are not a sanctioned gift from God."

Ok, let's see if we can get this straight once and for all. What you are saying is that the biblical definition of "unknown tongues" are not languages unknown, but vocal gibberish unknown.

So what you are saying is that in 1Cor.14 Paul is not talking about the Holy Spirit giving people the ability to communicate and translate in multiple languages or tongues, that when that person speaks and nobody understands they are praying unto God by a gift, but you believe everyone was speaking in an unknown gibberish.

Don't deceive yourself with taking random scripture quotes out of context.

You quote 1Cor.14:2, 14:14 & 14:16 seeking to lead people astray from the context of the entire verses.

"Although the miraculous sign of tongues was primarily a sign to unbelieving Israel, it was also used to further the Gospel in other nations (1 Corinthians 14:18,19) and to edify the whole Church of Christ assembled when it was interpreted for all to understand (1 Corinthians 14:12,13).

"There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.

11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

12Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret."

“Disputation on the Holy Scripture”
William Whitaker 1588

Independency a Great Schism: Proved Against Dr. John Owen, His Apology in his Tract of Schism – Daniel Cawdrey.

Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time: Wherein the Tenets of the principal Sects, especially of the Independents, are drawn together in one Map, for the most part, in the words of their own Authors, and their main principles are examined by the Touchstone of the Holy Scriptures – Robert Baillie. The author was one of the Scottish delegates to the Westminster Assembly.

Anabaptism, the True Fountain of Independency, Antinomy, Brownisme, Familisme, and the Most of the Other Errors, Which for the Time Do Trouble the Church of England, Unsealed – Robert Baillie.