What Church Is Most Biblical?

[Mannyfit75]

Keep silence IN THE church unless they have an interpreter Manny. A proper interpreter for the speaking in an unkown tongue.

Yes but where does it say that speaking in tongues is part of worship? Where does it say that on the first day of the week, the Apostles gather together in and speak in tongues.

You don’t see that.

This is what I see in the Bible:

And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight. - Acts 20:-7

On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him; that when I come, the collections be not then to be made. 1 Corinthians Chapter 16:2.

These passages sound very Catholic to me…

 

[BrianH]

=

Mannyfit75;2868516]Yes but where does it say that speaking in tongues is part of worship? .

1Cr 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

Paul is concerned that when the church comes together and if EVERYONE speaks in tongues at the same time, people will think they are mad. They WERE speaking in tongues in worship but he did not like HOW they were doing it.

1Cr 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or [one] unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:

Come in where Manny? The church of course.

1Cr 14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on [his] face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth

.
So the newly person is going to do what? “Worship” God with the rest of them. Sounds like worship to me.

1Cr 14:26 ¶ How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

Paul is criticial of how they are doing everything in an independent manner. He is not saying that when they come together they are not to speak in tongues. Are you saying that “when they come together” is referring to something different in this passage than the ones before? No way.

1Cr 14:27 If 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.

1Cr 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Keep silent WHERE if there is not an interpreter Manny? The church.

1Cr 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Where? In the church!

1Cr 14:34 Let 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.

Keep silent where? In the church once again.

 

[dosdog]

=

Paul is concerned that when the church comes together and if EVERYONE speaks in tongues at the same time, people will think they are mad. They WERE speaking in tongues in worship but he did not like HOW they were doing it.

Come in where Manny? The church of course.

.
So the newly person is going to do what? “Worship” God with the rest of them. Sounds like worship to me.

Paul is criticial of how they are doing everything in an independent manner. He is not saying that when they come together they are not to speak in tongues. Are you saying that “when they come together” is referring to something different in this passage than the ones before? No way.

Keep silent WHERE if there is not an interpreter Manny? The church.

Where? In the church!

Keep silent where? In the church once again.

Romans 16 5 And the church which is in their house. Salute Epenetus, my beloved: who is the firstfruits of Asia in Christ.

1 Corinthians 16 19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house, with whom I also lodge.

Colossians 4 15 Salute the brethren who are at Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church that is in his house.

 

[BrianH]

Romans 16 5 And the church which is in their house. Salute Epenetus, my beloved: who is the firstfruits of Asia in Christ.

1 Corinthians 16 19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house, with whom I also lodge.

Colossians 4 15 Salute the brethren who are at Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church that is in his house.

So you are indicating that the most biblical pattern IS to have the church in your home? I do not really disagree with that. In fact, I spent a little time in the house church movement…great people.
The fact remains, the early church clearly spoke in tongues as part of their worship service, often held in their homes. Fairly common knowledge…I thought…
Unless one contends that 1st Corinthians 14:23 is referring to a mid week worship service, which sounds downright Baptist to me!

 

[BrianH]

I wonder what the Catholic Encyclopedia says about this…

In post-Biblical times St. Irenæus tells us that “many” of his contemporaries were heard “speaking through the Spirit in all kinds (pantodapais) of tongues” (“Contra haer.”, V, vii; Eusebius, “Hist. eccl.”, V, vii). St. Francis Xavier is said to have preached in tongues unknown to him and St. Vincent Ferrer while using his native tongue was understood in others. From this last phenomenon Biblical glossolaly differs in being what St. Gregory Nazianzen points out as a marvel of speaking and not of hearing. Exegetes observe too that it was never used for preaching, although Sts. Augustine and Thomas seem to have overlooked this detail.

St. Paul’s Concept (I Corinthians 12-14).—For the Biblical data thus far examined we are indebted to the bosom friend and companion of St. Paul — St. Luke. That being true, the views of St. Paul on supernatural glossolaly must have coincided with those of St. Luke.

Now St. Paul had seen the gift conferred at Ephesus and St. Luke does not distinguish Ephesian glossolaly from that of Jerusalem. They must therefore have been alike and St. Paul seems to have had both in mind when he commanded the Corinthians (14:37) to employ none but articulate and “plain speech” in their use of the gift (9), and to refrain from such use in church unless even the unlearned could grasp what was said (16). No tongue could be genuine “without voice” and to use such a tongue would be the act of a barbarian (10, 11). For him the impulse to praise God in one or more strange tongues should proceed from the Holy Ghost. It was even then an inferior gift which he ranked next to last in a list of eight charismata. It was a mere “sign” and as such was intended not for believers but for unbelievers (22).

Gee…exactly what I have said…imagine that

 

[dosdog]

So you are indicating that the most biblical pattern IS to have the church in your home? I do not really disagree with that. In fact, I spent a little time in the house church movement…great people.
The fact remains, the early church clearly spoke in tongues as part of their worship service, often held in their homes. Fairly common knowledge…I thought…
Unless one contends that 1st Corinthians 14:23 is referring to a mid week worship service, which sounds downright Baptist to me!

China Catholics throng to church
Zhu Zhijin, originally from Chengde in nearby Hebei Province, was at the Southern Cathedral with two friends for morning Mass. The Chinese teacher said she also attends unofficial, underground Catholic churches in Beijing, often held in people’s homes. Worshippers at these churches do not want to hear the word of God filtered through China’s state-run churches, administered by the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association since 1957. “This kind of church is government-controlled and has no power,” said Ms Zhu, pointing to the Southern Cathedral’s towering facade. “The underground church is more traditional.”
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7009165.stm

 

[jmcrae]

Unless one contends that 1st Corinthians 14:23 is referring to a mid week worship service, which sounds downright Baptist to me!

I think the Catholics were the first to have the idea of “mid-week worship services” - we’ve had daily Mass for centuries, now.

We also have Charismatic meetings at times outside of Mass, where people pray and sing in tongues. This is also a very Catholic thing to do.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I think the Catholics were the first to have the idea of “mid-week worship services” - we’ve had daily Mass for centuries, now.

We also have Charismatic meetings at times outside of Mass, where people pray and sing in tongues. This is also a very Catholic thing to do.

The center of worship is Eucharistic Liturgy. Not tongues. Tongues were use back then because people could not speak other languages of other people. That why when in Acts the Apostles received the Holy Spirit on their head, and they were able to understand men from Egypt, Rome, Mestopemia… etc.

The service I witness in a Non-Denomination with their tongue speaking sounds too fake. If they had spoke in tongues, it would probably be a know language like Greek, Aramaic, Arabic, etc. Speaking in tongues is the ability to speak and understand other languages… It is a gift… it is not babble…

 

[GerardPaul]

The center of worship is Eucharistic Liturgy. Not tongues. Tongues were use back then because people could not speak other languages of other people. That why when in Acts the Apostles received the Holy Spirit on their head, and they were able to understand men from Egypt, Rome, Mestopemia… etc.

The service I witness in a Non-Denomination with their tongue speaking sounds too fake. If they had spoke in tongues, it would probably be a know language like Greek, Aramaic, Arabic, etc. Speaking in tongues is the ability to speak and understand other languages… It is a gift… it is not babble…

Please don’t decry a Christian that wants to use any of the Gifts of the Spirit. The good or bad works will be evidence of a true or false spirit of any type. I am for Tongues if one grows in the Spirit of Jesus Christ!

 

[Mannyfit75]

Please don’t decry a Christian that wants to use any of the Gifts of the Spirit. The good or bad works will be evidence of a true or false spirit of any type. I am for Tongues if one grows in the Spirit of Jesus Christ!

Yes but have you been to these Non-Denom where they speak tongues and they like babble? I have. When you speak tongues, you hear them speak in their own native tongues. They would either have a Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, Egyptian, or one of those languages we know. It’s not babble…

Take it from a soldier who hears the Our Father said in Aramaic by our Caldeanean brothers and sisters, or those Iraq Christians who said it in Arabic… The ability to speak tongues is the ability given to you by the Holy Spirit to help you understand a foreign language. He even allows you to speak Greek or Latin. without being taught…

 

[adrift]

I wonder what the Catholic Encyclopedia says about this…

Gee…exactly what I have said…imagine that

Not exactly more what Manny said.

There is enough in St. Paul to show us that the Corinthian peculiarities were ignoble accretions and abuses. They made of “tongues” a source of schism in the Church and of scandal without g(40).

This quote is after what you quoted.

Gift of Tongues

 

[BrianH]

Not exactly more what Manny said.

Was it part of early Christian worship? That is what I said… Please specifically quote where I have been inaccurate adrift!

 

[adrift]

Was it part of early Christian worship? That is what I said… Please specifically quote where I have been inaccurate adrift!

It does not say that it was early Catholic(Christian) Worship but it was a scandal.

 

[BrianH]

It does not say that it was early Catholic(Christian) Worship but it was a scandal.

So are you contending that is was not part of Christian worship?
When do you contend people were speaking in tongues? The entire chapter is about Christian worship.

Paul says in 1st Corinthians 14

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, **and forbid not to speak with tongues.**40 Let all things be done decently and in order

They way they were doing it was a scandal, to be sure, but it does not mean it was not part of Christian worship. I have never known anyone, well now I do, who contended something as indefensible as this assertion. Even the article you keep refering to NEVER says it was not part of worship.

 

[dosdog]

So are you contending that is was not part of Christian worship?
When do you contend people were speaking in tongues? The entire chapter is about Christian worship.

Paul says in 1st Corinthians 14

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, **and forbid not to speak with tongues.**40 Let all things be done decently and in order

They way they were doing it was a scandal, to be sure, but it does not mean it was not part of Christian worship. I have never known anyone, well now I do, who contended something as indefensible as this assertion. Even the article you keep refering to NEVER says it was not part of worship.

Your Church full of unbelievers?

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to believers, but to unbelievers;23 If therefore the whole church come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in unlearned persons or infidels, will they not say that you are mad?

 

[jmcrae]

So are you contending that is was not part of Christian worship?
When do you contend people were speaking in tongues? The entire chapter is about Christian worship.

Paul says in 1st Corinthians 14

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, **and forbid not to speak with tongues.**40 Let all things be done decently and in order

They way they were doing it was a scandal, to be sure, but it does not mean it was not part of Christian worship. I have never known anyone, well now I do, who contended something as indefensible as this assertion. Even the article you keep refering to NEVER says it was not part of worship.

Just like today, it was something that some of the people did, but it was not a regular feature at Mass. Most likely, just like today, they had separate meetings for the Charismatic prayer groups.

 

[BrianH]

Just like today, it was something that some of the people did, but it was not a regular feature at Mass. Most likely, just like today, they had separate meetings for the Charismatic prayer groups.

Does the Bible, or any of the ECF’s, support your view?

 

[BrianH]

Your Church full of unbelievers?

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to believers, but to unbelievers;23 If therefore the whole church come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in unlearned persons or infidels, will they not say that you are mad?

You just answered your own question with the quote. It says
If the the “whole church”, not just a little group as the last post suggests, comes together and an unlearned “persons or infidels” comes in…It does not say a church “full of unbelievers”

Paul is also making a point that not “all” should speak in tongues at the same time

 

[dosdog]

You just answered your own question with the quote. It says
If the the “whole church”, not just a little group as the last post suggests, comes together and an unlearned “persons or infidels” comes in…It does not say a church “full of unbelievers”

Paul is also making a point that not “all” should speak in tongues at the same time

Wrong not part of worship
1 Corinthians 14 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him hold his peace in the church, and speak to himself and to God.

 

[BrianH]

Wrong not part of worship
1 Corinthians 14 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him hold his peace in the church, and speak to himself and to God.

No. It is saying IF there is not an interpreter, let him remain silent. If there is an interpreter, and it is done in an orderly manner, there is not a problem. As 14:39 indicates.