RICHMOND, Va. (BP)--Trustees of the International Mission Board have initiated an action to ask the Southern Baptist Convention to remove one of their members.
The boardâs chairman, Tom Hatley, issued a three-paragraph statement Jan. 11 following a trustee vote the previous night in executive session, or closed session, to terminate the term of Wade Burleson, senior pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Enid, Okla., who served as president of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma from 2003-05.
The impetus for the meeting reports by Burleson and the other two men was their opposition to missionary personnel policies, which the trustees adopted during their Nov. 14-17 meeting in Huntsville, Ala. The policies involved believerâs baptism by immersion and the use of a âprivate prayer language,â which also was described as âglossolalia (speaking in tongues).â
PART 2 (from below); Even Jesus himself spoke to Paul in the Hebrew tongue from heaven (Act 26:14-15) âAnd when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.â
Even when the men of God in the Scriptures spoke back to the angels of God, it was in their own dialect:
As was said before, one Scripture cannot make a doctrine, especially when the context of the chapter being used is not emphasising that topic, such as 1 Corinthians 13, it is all about charity - not tongues of angels. Paul did not just say, âThough I speak with the tongues of men and of angelsâ, but he also said âThough I have the gift of prophesy; Though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor; Though I give my body to be burned.â Remember, the word âthoughâ means âand if/even ifâ. Did Paul ever give his body to be burned? No. He said âthough Iâ (even if). It is then the same for verse 1, âThough (even if) I speak with the tongues of men and of angelsâ. So the whole emphasis in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 is charity - not tongues.
One might say that Paul spoke in the tongues of angels, therefore claiming that those that do speak in tongues, speak with the tongues of angels (1Co 13:1) "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." The problem with this theory is that Paul never said he did speak with the tongues of angels; rather, he said "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels". The word 'though' means and if. Never in scripture do we find examples of any believers speaking in an angel tongue. One scripture can not be used to justify a donctrine when there are a majority that oppose it. In 1 Corinthians 13:1, Paul is talking about charity being the importance, not tongues. Without charity, no gift would be profitable. Even in Scripture, when an angel spoke to a man it was in the same language as that man. Even the shepherds in Luke 2:8-14 heard the heavenly host of angels singing and could clearly understand that they were singing.
The above is an excerpt from "Tongues: The Sign Gift" (By Graham Sly). If you would like a free copy;
Speaking in tongues in NT times was always to tell the gospel to someone who was present, in their own language. In today's church this so called gift is not used to speak to someone present, in their own tongue, but is incoherent babble that no one can confirm is from God and is said to be the language used by angels. Is it scriptural?
Martin Luther quotes, "Here the sectarians have brooded over the question of signs, vainly asking why they do not accompany our preaching and whether they no longer can be expected. It is enough to know that these signs followed as a testimony to, and public confirmation of, this Gospel message. They were especially necessary in the beginning, to further the spread of the Gospel message. But with the preaching of the word of God in all lands and tongues accomplished their prevailance became less frequent, and their testimony less necessary. Yet it is true that the same power and efficacy of Christ remains in Christendom. If it were necessary, such signs could even now be performed. It often took place, and still does, that devils were cast out in Christ's name; likewise the sick are healed by prayer in his name, and many receive help in great distress of both body and soul. The gospel is now being preached in new tongues, where it was unknown before."
What Luther has said is correct. God can still use these signs if He wills, but to see these signs in action today is very rare because we have the written word of God.
The above is an excerpt from "Tongues: The Sign Gift." If you would like to receive a free copy.
As a KJV-only, Fundamentalist Pentecostal, I find it totally amazing that so many of my blood-washed, broters and sisters in Christ, who declare their belief in the inerrancy of Scripture, claim that not all of the gifts of the Spirit (mentioned in I Cor. 12-14) are for the Church today. While we can find where the Spirit of God gave the Church the gifts several places in Scripture - The Book of Acts, I Cor. & II Timothy - we can find no place in Scripture where the Spirit of God took away any of the gifts of the Spirit from the Church. In fact, I used to be scared of people praying in tongues until I recieved the Baptism of the Holy Ghost while in a prayer meeting without anyone laying hands on me. Since then, I am edified by praying in tongues and am growing in my use of the gifts that the Spirit has given me. They help me to be a more powerful witness to the lost. The gifts also help me to pray for and minister to my brothes and sisters in Christ more effectively. Sometimes we reject something, just because we've never experienced it. What's foreign tends to be scarey. The Word of God is true. We must live by it and not refute it due to our experience or non-experience. We are to love one another. We are united by the Word and the Blood of Jesus
"We've talked about temporary gifts and permanent gifts and noted that some gifts of the Spirit were given for the establishing of the church and did not continue after the foundation of the church had been laid. Other gifts continue on down to today. We noted the gift of apostles as a temporary gift. There are no apostles today. Paul said he was the last of the apostles. We talked about spiritual gifts of signs or miracles and noted that they went with apostolic ministry and we would assume that they are not present today either, The gift of healing where an individual is able to heal people is not present today, but God definitely does respond to the prayers of His people and sometimes heals some illness or does some other supernatural thing. We noted that the gift of tongues was very simply the ability to speak in an earthly foreign language that you had never learned or studied. That's clearly set forth in Acts chapter 2 and is the pattern through the rest of Acts."
I Corinthians 14  But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.  He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.  I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.  Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? It is unfortunate that people who speak in "tongues" never really understood that all spiritual gifts are for ministry to OTHERS. to forbid not to speak in tongues is to allow others(unlearned people) to hear the Word in their own language. It is a language not a babble. If God chooses a German to hear a sermon in German in an English speaking church, then that is the gift of tongues for the unlearned. Yes, the gifts are still for today if God sovereignly chooses to use it. Read I corinthians 12, 13 & 14 over and over and it will clarify what the gift of tongues is
I have some serious problems with churches that will allow someone to stand up in the middle of service and start rambling on some UNKNOWN language. THen somebody will get up and interpret what is being said. This is pure nonsense. Paul says if all in the church are not edified you are to remain silent. I seriously doubt if even 1 person can verify if what these two are speaking is truth, let alone everyone. Churches that hold to this as truth have a truth problem themselves. A christian who constantly needs to see signs and wonders has a weak faith. We have Gods written word, and it IS FINISHED. AMEN
I take it those same people who speak in "tongues"are some of the same people who claim to have healing power just like the apostles. It makes me wonder why when they are walking the streets,and casting their shadow it never heals anyone,or you never find then in the cancer wards healing the dying,or making limbs grow again
The Apostle makes it clear that the "tongue" is to be a real language by the fact that he instructs that there is to be an interpreter in order to edify the church. Allow me an example. If I am in a prayer meeting in my church and a Hebrew believer speaks "Shima Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu Adonai Echad", and someone there understands Hebrew and explains that the tongue spoken was Deuteronomy 6:4, then the church is edified. Similarly, if I speak out "Pater Noster que es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuam et reneat vegnat tuam" (not sure of the spelling here all you scholars), and someone who understands Latin says "oh he is just reciting the Lord's prayer, then the church is edified. If someone speaks "Kyrie Eleson, Kriste Eleson", and a Greek person interprets it as "Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy", the church is edified. If however, some yahoo shouts out "Aagh uma babaloo woo ka ka sula dufus" and no one understands it,no one can interpret it AND the mumbler himself doesn't know what he said, then there is no edification-there is confusion, Scripture tells us, "God is not the author of confussion".
Well said msc. Strange that there are not more comments posted here. Judging by the doctrinal leanings of the folks who usually post it would seem obvious that most would not believe in the speaking of tongues and yet regardless of what one's denomination may think or what one's lack of experience may be with a particular spiritual gift, it remains a fact that it is a huge hypocritical contradiction to say that one stands on the Word of God alone and yet at the same time say that tongues are of the devil, not for today or some other such nonsense. 1 Corinthians chapters 12, 13, & 14 make the whole matter perfectly clear if anyone cares to simply read what the Word says and not try to twist it. Do all speak in tongues? Of course not. Do I? No. But I have good friends who do and I know it is a real gift for them. Some would look at those who falsely profess to have the gift but do not as proof that it doesn't exist, yet a counterfeit of anything serves only to prove the reality of the real thing. Furthermore, a person's experiences or lack thereof should never be used to determine one's spiritual beliefs. God's Word alone should indeed be the final test. In summary, it is a legitimate gift same as all the others and we are certainly not to forbid it as you have mentioned above.