"Drunk in the Spirit"

[Joy]

Here's a practice I have a problem with. Some groups seem to think you just have to coach people to have a gift. I'm not averse to biblical training, but when you're telling people, "Just cackle like a hen, honey, just cackle like a hen," that doesn't suddenly give everybody in the congregation who cackles the Spirit's gift of tongues, or any God-given gift.

Or the time I visited a church where the speaker directed everyone to give a word of wisdom, as I recall, to some nearby. Well, that is not my gift, but hey, I could certainly quote a relevant Scripture. So the closest person was apparently a staff member, and I gave a verse on repentance.

I should add, though, that someone in that church (who knew nothing about me) apparently with one of the gifts, spoke to me with sound, biblical advice, and brought up things they couldn't have known on their own.

[Neto]

Here's a practice I have a problem with. Some groups seem to think you just have to coach people to have a gift. I'm not averse to biblical training, but when you're telling people, "Just cackle like a hen, honey, just cackle like a hen," that doesn't suddenly give everybody in the congregation who cackles the Spirit's gift of tongues, or any God-given gift.

Or the time I visited a church where the speaker directed everyone to give a word of wisdom, as I recall, to some nearby. Well, that is not my gift, but hey, I could certainly quote a relevant Scripture. So the closest person was apparently a staff member, and I gave a verse on repentance.
....

[Neto]

I hesitated to post this here, because someone might jump on it to criticize the MB church, but one of my former pastors there had the gift of tongues. But the only reason I ever found out was because he told me this, during a time when he was counseling me about an issue related to this.

I'm just saying it now to indicate that this gift is sometimes used in such a manner that a casual observer will not know.

EDIT: Oh, one other thing. Someone may have already mentioned this, but the language used in the passage that says "Do not be drunk with wine, but be filled with the Holy Spirit", implies a similarity between drunkenness and the Spirit-filled life, a sort of giving up one's own control to be "under the influence" of some other power.

[Sudsy]

One of these are physical healings which are talked about often as being a certain percent healed. They are told to keep 'pressing in' to get full healing. Can't find any healings in scripture that were not completely 100% or they were not healed. Anyway, they do attract people who want to see signs and wonders and are open to all kinds of things that appear to be supernatural works of God.

Well, there is that time Jesus got the blind man half-healed, and had to daub more mud on his eyes before he was fully healed.

Mark 8

22 And they came to Bethsaida; and they bring to him a blind man, and they besought him that he would touch him.

23 And taking the blind man by the hand, he led him out of the town; and spitting upon his eyes, laying his hands on him, he asked him if he saw any thing.

24 And looking up, he said: I see men as it were trees, walking.

I guess if Jesus had to do a thing twice, a lesser man might have to work a bit harder to get something done. In today's world of weakened faith, one might have to "seek God diligently" to get the sought outcome. So I can see the reasoning.

Thankyou, I forgot about this occurrence. I will look into commentaries about this and see what they may have to say. On the surface I don't believe it was a lack of faith on Jesus part on His first acts to heal. I will study this more.

[Sudsy]

Why aren't the old Mennonite ladies in in conservative Menno churches suddenly falling into the aisles and wreathing with the Spirit? Or jumping up and speaking in tongues in the middle of the service? Why don't we ever see that in Episcopal Churches or Lutheran Churches? Surely there is at least ONE good Christian in all those other churches who is going to be seized by the Holy Spirit on occasion if it is actually a real thing.

Maybe they don't want to do those things?

1 Corinthians 14:32

And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

The Holy Spirit is not like a demon possession. The believer has the Spirit under his/her will.

I agree with this possibility. Another question that comes to mind is why were tongues and other spiritual gifts not referred to in letters to the other churches by Paul ? Of all the early churches Paul wrote letters to, the Corinthian church was certainly not a group of perfect Christians in various ways. I suppose some will say that these letters were all copied and shared with all of these churches. Is there some proof of this ? My old brain doesn't recall as it once did in some areas.

[Sudsy]

Here's a practice I have a problem with. Some groups seem to think you just have to coach people to have a gift. I'm not averse to biblical training, but when you're telling people, "Just cackle like a hen, honey, just cackle like a hen," that doesn't suddenly give everybody in the congregation who cackles the Spirit's gift of tongues, or any God-given gift.

Or the time I visited a church where the speaker directed everyone to give a word of wisdom, as I recall, to some nearby. Well, that is not my gift, but hey, I could certainly quote a relevant Scripture. So the closest person was apparently a staff member, and I gave a verse on repentance.

I should add, though, that someone in that church (who knew nothing about me) apparently with one of the gifts, spoke to me with sound, biblical advice, and brought up things they couldn't have known on their own.

I have always thought something the same about 'coaching'. In my Pentecostal upbringing it was felt very important for a new believer to 'be baptised in the Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues'. And I saw all kinds of 'coaching' like 'raise your hands to receive'; 'say Jesus name quickly over and over'; 'let go brother'; 'hang on brother', etc. And I have seen people rocked back and forth by others until they were on their back on the floor (which was often regarded as 'slain by the Spirit'). None of this I find as practise in the early church (again correct me if I missed this in scripture).

My cousin married a new believer from the Salvation Army and he began attending our Pentecostal church and they prayed for him many times to have this experience of being 'baptised in the Spirit'. He got very discouraged and with all the coaching he never spoke in other tongues. They left the church and went back to the Salvation Army where the two of them served the Lord for the past 50+ years. There is a text, I believe in the Corinthian letters, that asks 'do all speak in tongues' implying that 'no,, some do not'.

I have my own views on what kind of evidence a believer needs to know they have the Holy Spirit now living in them and I believe all of the gifts of the Spirit are still given out today as the Spirit determines to give them. I also believe other spirits can influence a believer to do things not sourced by the Holy Spirit and in 'Charismatic' churches this occurs. We are to try the spirits to see if they are of God or some other source.

With all that said, I think some believers are afraid of the supernatural perhaps because of these displays of other spirit's that are credited to the Holy Spirit. Some want to believe that God only speaks to us today by the Bible. So, for 1900+ years since most Christians had no personal copy of the Bible, God was not speaking ? I don't follow this reasoning.

[ohio jones]

I agree with this possibility. Another question that comes to mind is why were tongues and other spiritual gifts not referred to in letters to the other churches by Paul ? Of all the early churches Paul wrote letters to, the Corinthian church was certainly not a group of perfect Christians in various ways.

He also wrote about spiritual gifts to the Romans, but without mentioning tongues. Is it necessary to cover every subject in every writing? You haven't mentioned raising hands in this thread yet, have you?

But the fact that the lists of gifts are not identical suggests that the lists are descriptive, not definitive. In other words, there may be additional gifts that are not mentioned. This should not be surprising if we consider that God's ways are higher than ours, and that gifts are given "as He wills" and not limited by our understanding.

[Sudsy]

I agree with this possibility. Another question that comes to mind is why were tongues and other spiritual gifts not referred to in letters to the other churches by Paul ? Of all the early churches Paul wrote letters to, the Corinthian church was certainly not a group of perfect Christians in various ways.

He also wrote about spiritual gifts to the Romans, but without mentioning tongues. Is it necessary to cover every subject in every writing? You haven't mentioned raising hands in this thread yet, have you?

But the fact that the lists of gifts are not identical suggests that the lists are descriptive, not definitive. In other words, there may be additional gifts that are not mentioned. This should not be surprising if we consider that God's ways are higher than ours, and that gifts are given "as He wills" and not limited by our understanding.

Yes, I mentioned raising hands in the previous post.

I think most believers I know view the spiritual gifts listed in the scriptures as spiritual gifts are the ones we need to know and there is even an order on what gifts to seek over others. This is not 'limiting God', imo. I agree that the scripture says that the Spirit gives out gifts as He determines.

Are all Christian churches seeking Spiritual gifts ? No, some do not see them applicable today or some believe they might be but never preach on seeking them for the benefit of the church.

It is somewhat surprising how certain NT texts (I.e. within Anabaptists) gets so much attention (I.e. the headcovering) whereas seeking for Spiritual gifts, at least on this forum, are seldom, if ever, discussed as steps of obedience.

[temporal1]

But the fact that the lists of gifts are not identical suggests that the lists are descriptive, not definitive. In other words, there may be additional gifts that are not mentioned. This should not be surprising if we consider that God's ways are higher than ours, and that gifts are given "as He wills" and not limited by our understanding.

Diamond

[Ken]

However, the "jibberish" part, I take issue with. "Of men and Angels" - Paul says. Just because it isn't a human language doesn't mean it's without meaning. Who knows what tongue the Disciples were speaking in on Pentecost, wherein every man who heard them heard them in their native tongue. I wouldn't be so quick to judge that...

There are plenty of videos on YouTube taken in churches where people are supposedly speaking in tongues. Should we watch some and see if we can come to any conclusions?