Speaking in tongues

[Latter Days Guy]

I was just watching the Modern Prophets video on President John Taylor, early on it mentioned that when he was praying next to Niagara Falls he had spoke in tongues.  I've never really heard of LDS speaking in tongues before so was wondering, what if any experiences people had of this gift of the Spirit?  During my time at bible college there was much speaking in tongues during prayer meetings and worship services (well there would be as it was an Assemblies of God college!). Though I personally believed that this particular gift was more to do with others being able to understand the gospel message in their own language even when it wasn't being spoken by the person talking, like in the book of Acts and not some random sounding babble that was often heard at college! Not that I'm denigrating what was at the time a very spiritual experience, I've just changed my own personal view on what I believe that particular gift was and is.  So what if any experiences do you have with this gift, and what do you think its role/purpose is today for the church? 

[Vort]

In general, the gifts of the Spirit are for the benefit of those who (already) believe. Speaking in tongues was the one spiritual gift that was given to convince outsiders of the truthfulness of the gospel.

 

I do not understand the gift of speaking in tongues to mean what is commonly called "glossolalia". I understand it to mean speaking in real human languages, though possibly ancient or extinct (e.g. Adamic). It appears to have some connection to the gift of prophecy.

 

When I was in the MTC, I was told that we could observe the gift of tongues all around us, every day. I liked that idea, but I am not sure I really believe it. Most foreign language missionaries simply don't speak their target language all that well.

 

Of course, the hands-down best missionary I ever met was a woman (I would say "young woman", but she was 28, and that didn't seem all that young to me at the time) serving in Italy who, at the end of her mission, could not speak Italian. That is, she could basically communicate, but she didn't do things like, oh, conjugate her verbs or pronounce her vowels (or consonants) correctly. Seriously, she sounded like a missionary who had been out for a month. But she opened her mouth and worked hard, and as I recall, baptized about as many people as the rest of the mission combined. She did far more good during her mission than I did in mine, though my Italian was certainly better than hers. So which of us had the true divine gift of tongues? My vote would be with her.

 

Which I suppose is all to say that I don't think I really understand what the gift of tongues is, beyond the bare scriptural definition.

[prisonchaplain]

Here's an article from MormonWiki on "Adamic Language."  It's the closest that LDS come to glossolalia.

 

http://www.mormonwiki.org/Adamic_language.html

 

 

By way of explanation on what OP experienced at the A/G college, it was likely what would be labeled an "angelic language," or simply an "unknown tongue."  Pentecostals believe that most tongues-speech is either meant for immediate interpretation (i.e. during a church service), or it is meant as private prayer directly to God, inspired by the Holy Spirit.  Thus, it would not need to be a human tongue.  Of all the incidences in Acts, only Acts 2 seems to show tongues as human languages.  In none of the other cases does that seem to be the case (no international crowd, for example).

[priesthoodpower]

When I was a kid there was an older gentleman in my ward that had a speech impediment and spoke with a slur, years later he became the patriarch for our stake.

 

When I turned 15 I went to get my patriarchal blessing. I did not go to this brother because my grandfather was also a patriarch, but in a different stake, so I got my blessing from my grandfather.

 

A friend of mine in my stake got her patriarchal blessing from our stake patriarch (the one with a slur). My friend said that as the patriarch started the blessing his slur went away and he spoke clearly, after the blessing his slur came back.

 

Speaking with tongue? LOL

 

ps - its interesting though how this same friend told me that she knew the priesthood was true because of this experience. Yet 20 years later after serving a mission and marrying in the temple and raising a family of 3 kids she is now anti-mormon. Yes, she is my wife.

 

Laman, Lemuel?

[Vort]

I am so sorry, PP. That is tragic. I hope that story ultimately has a happy ending.

[Guest]

I've only had two experiences with speaking in tongues.

 

First -- my mission.  

 

I did not have the benefit of language training in the MTC.  I was supposed to be an English speaking missionary.  Fast forward -- I'm a Spanish speaking missionary and struggling.  We had a particular discussion where everything just flowed out of my mouth in Spanish.  And it was not me thinking in English, then translating really fast.  I actually thought in Spanish.  The words that most readily came to my mouth were Spanish.

 

After the discussion, I stumbled over every word again.  I was thinking in English again.  I could barely understand anything anyone said.

 

Second -- A few years ago.

 

Essentially the same effect when I was talking to an investigator that the missionaries brought to church one day.

 

How do I know it was tongues?  Maybe I don't.  But even as I got completely fluent, I NEVER thought in Spanish.  It was only those times.

[Guest]

Some bits of trivia re LDS speaking in tongues.  

 

1) We often hear that we are to have a translator present.  I believe this is the general pattern to follow, but I don't believe it is necessary.  See next line.

2) We hear stories in early Church history about individuals speaking in tongues.  Most of the time a translator is present. A few I've read about (sorry I don't have references--it's difficult to keep all references in mind after so many years of study) no translator was present.  And yet, it was clear that all were edified and all understood the message.  I guess you could say that if everyone understood, everyone was a translator.

3) It is not always to teach the gospel to others (i.e. missionary work).  It is sometimes the only way to really get a message across.  There is no true "translation" into our tongues.  Hence, the interpretation of tongues is required.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Guest

[Blackmarch]

In general, the gifts of the Spirit are for the benefit of those who (already) believe. Speaking in tongues was the one spiritual gift that was given to convince outsiders of the truthfulness of the gospel.

 

I do not understand the gift of speaking in tongues to mean what is commonly called "glossolalia". I understand it to mean speaking in real human languages, though possibly ancient or extinct (e.g. Adamic). It appears to have some connection to the gift of prophecy.

 

When I was in the MTC, I was told that we could observe the gift of tongues all around us, every day. I liked that idea, but I am not sure I really believe it. Most foreign language missionaries simply don't speak their target language all that well.

 

Of course, the hands-down best missionary I ever met was a woman (I would say "young woman", but she was 28, and that didn't seem all that young to me at the time) serving in Italy who, at the end of her mission, could not speak Italian. That is, she could basically communicate, but she didn't do things like, oh, conjugate her verbs or pronounce her vowels (or consonants) correctly. Seriously, she sounded like a missionary who had been out for a month. But she opened her mouth and worked hard, and as I recall, baptized about as many people as the rest of the mission combined. She did far more good during her mission than I did in mine, though my Italian was certainly better than hers. So which of us had the true divine gift of tongues? My vote would be with her.

 

Which I suppose is all to say that I don't think I really understand what the gift of tongues is, beyond the bare scriptural definition.

when I was at the MTC one of the experiences of an english speaking (did not have or recieve any training in other languages) missionary at the call center picked up a call from a  spanish speaker and after a few seconds into the call started to speak (and understand) spanish fluently enough to be able to finish the call and get the relevant information to send to the missionaries in the field. when it was over he didn't realise he had been speaking spanish.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

When I was in the MTC, I was told that we could observe the gift of tongues all around us, every day. I liked that idea, but I am not sure I really believe it. 

 

I agree.  I was told the same thing in the MTC.  But in my current employment, they strive to only hire people who are bilingual English/Spanish.  So a lot of my co-workers are bilingual, and also ask them where they learned to speak Spanish.  Quite a few were in the Peace Corps.  Which I believe means they had a similar amount of language training, and time in the country....and from what I can tell a similar grasp of the language.  

 

But I had a friend once that I believe had this gift.  She was studying Russian in college, and failing spectacularly.  A Catholic friend suggested that she apply to teach Russian at the MTC.  Holly said, "I can't.  I'm horrible at Russian."  Her friend said not to worry, they were desperate.  Clearly so if they had a Catholic teaching Russian at the MTC.

 

So Holly applied and got an interview.  The interview was in Russian, and she said it was a disaster.  She didn't know why they went on to the next part...teaching a discussion...but they did.  When she started to teach the discussion, suddenly Russian flowed in to her mind and she could speak the language.  She got the job.

 

I would have said that that was a one-time need-based gift.  But she told me how later she made a Spanish speaking friend who barely spoke English.  She was studying Spanish at the time so she started attempting to communicate with him.  A similar thing happened....one day she was talking to him, and the Spanish just seemed to click.  And she could speak Spanish.  I've heard her speak Spanish.  She has a thick accent, but otherwise a good command of the language.

 

I think her skill with language is the gift of tongues.

 

I think the gift of tongues can be manifested in other ways as well, such as the way I think Latter Day Guy was referring to.  However, as Satan as the ability to mimic some gifts...this one in particular...the Lord doesn't use this gift as often as some of the others.  

 

Here's a quote from the Gospel Principles manual:

 

Satan can imitate the gifts of tongues, prophecy, visions, healings, and other miracles. Moses had to compete with Satan’s imitations in Pharaoh’s court (see Exodus 7:8–22). Satan wants us to believe in his false prophets, false healers, and false miracle workers. They may appear to be so real to us that the only way to know is to ask God for the gift of discernment. The devil himself can appear as an angel of light (see 2 Nephi 9:9).

Satan wants to blind us to the truth and keep us from seeking the true gifts of the Spirit. Mediums, astrologers, fortune tellers, and sorcerers are inspired by Satan even if they claim to follow God. Their works are abominable to the Lord (see Isaiah 47:12–14; Deuteronomy 18:9–10). We should avoid all associations with the powers of Satan.

https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-22-the-gifts-of-the-spirit?lang=eng

 

Oh a different note....on my mission I was accused by some of being the Devil disguised as an angel of light.  I don't think they were kidding.  I was quite amused by that, though looking back perhaps I should have taken it a little more seriously.  It was a very small town with some uneducated people that also apparently believed that Mormons kidnap kids and sell their organs in the United States and things like that.  One evening deep in the night, someone(s)?  came and threw rocks at our apartment and called us names.  We felt surprisingly calm and protected in our apartment though, and no harm came to us.  

[Traveler]

It is my personal belief and understanding that speaking in tongues - in and of it's self - is not as important as many may be thinking it to be.  I believe we are looking too much at the surface of such a thing and not realizing that there is something else far more important in the depths of our souls.

[prisonchaplain]

I love speaking in tongues because they are not practical, necessary, 'important,' etc.  God moves my tongue and makes noise through me.  In the process I sense his presence, and there is a deep communion that takes place.  If tongues were a mere surface thing, I doubt God would have instituted it in the first place.  He chose a humbling experience to invite us to greater depth with him.  There's something powerful in that.

[Traveler]

I love speaking in tongues because they are not practical, necessary, 'important,' etc.  God moves my tongue and makes noise through me.  In the process I sense his presence, and there is a deep communion that takes place.  If tongues were a mere surface thing, I doubt God would have instituted it in the first place.  He chose a humbling experience to invite us to greater depth with him.  There's something powerful in that.

In comparison to what?  Assisting the fatherless and the widow?  Sorry but it is part of my logical skepticism about this; or anything that seem to be to be a distraction from efforts to accomplish something worthwhile.  I also find it interesting that the gift of tongues is not something of importance for the 4,000 years of the Old Testament?

 

I had a second thought about this response - I do not want it to appear as criticism as much as a lack of understanding on my part.  It is hard for me to invest or think G-d invests in things that are not profitable for good.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Traveler

[Guest]

It is my personal belief and understanding that speaking in tongues ... is not as important as many may be thinking it to be.  I believe we are looking too much at the surface of such a thing and not realizing that there is something else far more important in the depths of our souls.

 

Sorry I don't have the reference.  But I remember reading a scripture that essentially said: Hey will you quit it with the seeking after the gift of tongues?  There are many other gifts of the Spirit that are much greater then the gift of tongues.  You should seek after faith, discernment, and prophecy.  They are much more important.

[prisonchaplain]

I'll respond to both Traveler and Carborendum:  There seems to be an unnecessary dichotomy here--between the obvious good of helping others and tongues; or between 'superior gifts' and tongues.  In the first case I would say I can help the poor and widowed better if I am walking in the fullness of the Spirit.  If tongues coincides with spiritual empowerment, then I ought to humble myself enough to receive God's gift, and then go about his business.  Concerning Paul's chastising of the Corinthians, they were using tongues in showy ways, carrying on during church services, such that new-comers were confused, and sound teaching was often set to the side, in favor of the ecstatic experiences.  Paul also said he was grateful he spoke in tongues more than all of them.  He was not belittling tongues, he was blaming the Corinthians for misusing them and neglecting other gifts.

 

I suppose a simple analogy would be that better is superior to good.  Yet, good is still good. 

[Guest]

Yes. That was it.  Thanks.

 

I had a difficult time explaining myself to a woman in a class I was teaching.  I made the statement, "The gift of tongues is a lesser gift..."  She expressed her objection and testified of an experience when she was given the gift of tongues.  I was puzzled by her reaction and couldn't make sense of why she was behaving this way.

 

After some thought later that day I realized that when I said it was "lesser" she took it to mean "bad" or even "false".  I never meant it that way.  And I didn't here.  I realize it can be a real and true gift of God.  And any gift from the Lord is a good gift.  But there are better ones.

[Traveler]

I'll respond to both Traveler and Carborendum:  There seems to be an unnecessary dichotomy here--between the obvious good of helping others and tongues; or between 'superior gifts' and tongues.  In the first case I would say I can help the poor and widowed better if I am walking in the fullness of the Spirit.  If tongues coincides with spiritual empowerment, then I ought to humble myself enough to receive God's gift, and then go about his business.  Concerning Paul's chastising of the Corinthians, they were using tongues in showy ways, carrying on during church services, such that new-comers were confused, and sound teaching was often set to the side, in favor of the ecstatic experiences.  Paul also said he was grateful he spoke in tongues more than all of them.  He was not belittling tongues, he was blaming the Corinthians for misusing them and neglecting other gifts.

 

I suppose a simple analogy would be that better is superior to good.  Yet, good is still good. 

 In my mind is it not a matter of necessity or unnecessary but a matter of focus and value.  It is my general understanding that to connect with the spirit; it is much more likely to successful in the pursuit of service of others (especially those most in need) than to seek personal embellishments.  Thus I believe that we should seek to serve others as the primary goal of our worship and be content with whatever gifts of the spirit G-d grants us and not expectant or desirable of gifts not given - and most certainly not covetous of other gifts or thinking in any way our spiritual gifts are any better than those given to others.

[Colirio]

I also find it interesting that the gift of tongues is not something of importance for the 4,000 years of the Old Testament?

Rarely do I post anything these days, but are we forgetting one of the GREATEST examples in all of the scriptures concerning the gift of tongues???

Numbers 22:27 And when the ass saw the angel of the Lord, she fell down under Balaam: and Balaam’s anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff.

28 And the Lord opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?

29 And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.

30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay.

[Vort]

Great thought, Corilio.

 

I have long thought that Balaaim's talking ass was a storytelling device, not an actual donkey speaking ancient Hebrew. So I would not have considered this an instance of the spiritual gift of tongues. But if it is, or if we consider it to be so, the idea that animals might have the ability to speak and express themselves intelligently, as humans do, opens up a whole world of unanswered questions, such as:

• Do animals have self-existent, individual intelligences?
• Are they subject to the gifts of the Spirit?
• Might they be more faithful or less faithful in filling the measure of their creation?
• Does all this imply that animals sons and daughters of God, in a similar sense to how we are?
• Does all this imply a model of evolution or growth of the individual spirit through stages from lesser being to greater being to human being, a sort of almost transmigration of souls (aka reincarnation)?

These are highly unorthodox beliefs, and the traditional answer to all of them has been "no". (The first one may not be quite as unorthodox as the rest.) I am very orthodox in such matters, so I tend to disbelieve all of them. But my understanding is limited.

 

Anyway, thanks for the interesting thought.

[Colirio]

Well, not to stray too far from the topic at hand, we do have a few scriptures from which to gain insight to a couple of your questions.

D&C 77:1 Q. What is the sea of glass spoken of by John, 4th chapter, and 6th verse of the Revelation?

A. It is the earth, in its sanctified, immortal, and eternal state.

2 Q. What are we to understand by the four beasts, spoken of in the same verse?

A. They are figurative expressions, used by the Revelator, John, in describing heaven, the paradise of God, the happiness of man, and of beasts, and of creeping things, and of the fowls of the air; that which is spiritual being in the likeness of that which is temporal; and that which is temporal in the likeness of that which is spiritual; the spirit of man in the likeness of his person, as also the spirit of the beast, and every other creature which God has created.

3 Q. Are the four beasts limited to individual beasts, or do they represent classes or orders?

A. They are limited to four individual beasts, which were shown to John, to represent the glory of the classes of beings in their destined order or sphere of creation, in the enjoyment of their eternal felicity.

4 Q. What are we to understand by the eyes and wings, which the beasts had?

A. Their eyes are a representation of light and knowledge, that is, they are full of knowledge; and their wings are a representation of power, to move, to act, etc.

The Prophet Joseph Smith also stated:

“Says one, ‘I cannot believe in the salvation of beasts.’ Any man who would tell you this could not be, would tell you that the revelations are not true. John heard the words of the beast giving glory to God, and understood them. God who made the beasts could understand every language spoken by them. The beasts were four of the most noble animals that filled the measure of their creation, and had been saved from other worlds, because they were perfect. They were like angels in their sphere. We are not told where they came from, and I do not know; but they were seen and heard by John praising and glorifying God.” (DHC, vol. 5, pp. 343–44.)

[Anddenex]

There are three manifestations in which a person can speak in tongues:

 

1) The gift of tongues with regard to speaking a known language (Mission examples and Joseph Smith when the interpreter wasn't speaking his exact words to the Indians).

 

2) The gift of tongues with an unknown language, at least to us, nonetheless, it is still language.  This is where an interpreter is necessary because if not it doesn't edify or uplift the Saints. The interpretation comes by the power of the Holy Spirit. To speak in an unknown language, what one might call gibberish, isn't the gift of tongues.

 

3) To speak by the power of the Holy Ghost is also speaking by the gift of tongues, or by the tongue of angels.  

 

Number 1 and 3 should be the most sought after manifestations of the gift of tongues.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Anddenex

[Latter Days Guy]

There are three manifestations in which a person can speak in tongues:

 

1) The gift of tongues with regard to speaking a known language (Mission examples and Joseph Smith when the interpreter wasn't speaking his exact words to the Indians).

 

2) The gift of tongues with an unknown language, at least to us, nonetheless, it is still language.  This is where an interpreter is necessary because if not it doesn't edify or uplift the Saints. The interpretation comes by the power of the Holy Spirit. To speak in an unknown language, what one might call gibberish, isn't the gift of tongues.

 

3) To speak by the power of the Holy Ghost is also speaking by the gift of tongues, or by the tongue of angels.  

 

Number 1 and 3 should be the most sought after manifestations of the gift of tongues.

 

I agree totally.  Point 2 is interesting as when I was at bible college it certainly sounded like gibberish to me!  Though there was often interpretation as well. I believed that this was tongues because that was what I was told it was.  I even had experience of it myself.  Now many years down the line I'm not so sure it was.  Is what is called today speaking in tongues the same as what is recorded in the bible?  I'm not sure it is.

[JojoBag]

There is a lot of interesting ideas going around the Church when it comes to various points of the gospel.  You have to be careful because many of those ideas are not based on doctrine but traditional answers that get passed on from one person to another.  Those ideas morph into something other than the truth and finally becomes "doctrine." 

 

Joseph Smith had a bit to say regarding the Gift of Tongues.   He said that the Gift of Tongues is the “smallest,” or least important of all the spiritual gifts (HC 5:30) and is primarily for speaking to other people in their own language. Also, he stated that there must be an interpreter present to give the meaning of what was spoken. Lastly, anything spoken in tongues can not become doctrine because the Devil can also speak in tongues. I've included some quotes from the Prophet, Joseph Smith.

 

 

Every spirit, or vision, or singing, is not of God. The devil is an orator; he is powerful; he took our Savior on to a pinnacle of the Temple, and kept Him in the wilderness for forty days. The gift of discerning spirits will be given to the Presiding Elder. Pray for him that he may have this gift. Speak not in the gift of tongues without understanding it, or without interpretation. The devil can speak in tongues; the adversary will come with his work; he can tempt all classes; can speak in English or Dutch. Let no one speak in tongues unless he interpret, except by the consent of the one who is placed to preside; then he may discern or interpret, or another may. (HC 3:392)

 

 

If you have a matter to reveal, let it be in your own tongue; do not indulge too much in the exercise of the gift of tongues, or the devil will take advantage of the innocent and unwary. You may speak in tongues for your own comfort, but I lay this down for a rule, that if anything is taught by the gift of tongues, it is not to be received for doctrine. (HC 4:607)

 

 

Be not so curious about tongues, do not speak in tongues except there be an interpreter present; the ultimate design of tongues is to speak to foreigners, and if persons are very anxious to display their intelligence, let them speak to such in their own tongues. The gifts of God are all useful in their place, but when they are applied to that which God does not intend, they prove an injury, a snare and a curse instead of a blessing. (HC 5:31)

[prisonchaplain]

I agree totally.  Point 2 is interesting as when I was at bible college it certainly sounded like gibberish to me!  Though there was often interpretation as well. I believed that this was tongues because that was what I was told it was.  I even had experience of it myself.  Now many years down the line I'm not so sure it was.  Is what is called today speaking in tongues the same as what is recorded in the bible?  I'm not sure it is.

 

My guess is that, if you were in a chapel, or a small Bible study group, or just a group of praying students, that what most were exhibiting was #3.  Today it's often called a "prayer language."  The individuals are communing with the Holy Spirit--praying to God by the Spirit's power.  Some churches allow for "corporate worship," where individuals are allowed to pray out this way, even though it's not meant for interpretation.  Guests, and those unfamiliar, are often confused, and even troubled by this kind of display.  So, these days it is more common to relegate that type of tongues speech to private worship, or to small groups.  Really, such experiences are for the individual. 

 

An interpretation should be needed when the tongues are spoken out for all to hear.  This is the familiar "Gift of Tongues."  It means God wants to say something to the congregation.  An interpretation must follow.  If not, a pastor or deacon will probably counsel the individual later on, to not speak out unless s/he knows there is an interpreter.  One time I spoke out, and there was no other interpreter, so God gave me the interpretation to speak.

[Traveler]

My guess is that, if you were in a chapel, or a small Bible study group, or just a group of praying students, that what most were exhibiting was #3.  Today it's often called a "prayer language."  The individuals are communing with the Holy Spirit--praying to God by the Spirit's power.  Some churches allow for "corporate worship," where individuals are allowed to pray out this way, even though it's not meant for interpretation.  Guests, and those unfamiliar, are often confused, and even troubled by this kind of display.  So, these days it is more common to relegate that type of tongues speech to private worship, or to small groups.  Really, such experiences are for the individual. 

 

An interpretation should be needed when the tongues are spoken out for all to hear.  This is the familiar "Gift of Tongues."  It means God wants to say something to the congregation.  An interpretation must follow.  If not, a pastor or deacon will probably counsel the individual later on, to not speak out unless s/he knows there is an interpreter.  One time I spoke out, and there was no other interpreter, so God gave me the interpretation to speak.

 

I have pondered this thread for some time.  I have wondered what I am missing.  I do not want to sound critical - especially of something valued and believed to be sacred to others - but there is a principle concerning divine nature that troubles me on this subject.  This principle has to do with the basis of good verses evil.  The essence of the principle is that which turns someone inward toward self is contrary to divine nature.  That which turns a person outward to sacrifice the self for the benefit of others is the essence of divine nature.

 

Seeking spiritual gifts; I worry is a temptation of turning inward and the beginning of selfishness.  My personal experiences with spiritual gifts is that as soon as I begin to identify a spiritual gift as a personal talent or achievement - I subtly and ever so unconsciously replace service of others with service of self. 

 

I realize that the spirit and gifts of the spirit bring feeling of joy and well being but drugs can do much the same thing.  What I am trying to communicate is that I have come to understand and believe that when the feeling of joy and well being becomes a goal and purpose we have opened ourselves for opportunity for a counterfeit spirit - which is much easier to obtain and use than a truly divine spirit that fosters self sacrifice and discipline and is not ever an ability innate within us.

Edited October 22, 2015 by Traveler

[Guest]

Traveler,

 

I hear your concern.  Maybe there is a danger.  Maybe there is not.

 

1)      If it is a true gift of God, then it is not something we can develop.  It is a gift.

2)      If it is a true gift of God, then it is not for our benefit but to benefit others.  (For example: We do not heal ourselves.  We heal others.)  Other gifts may appear to only benefit ourselves.  But if that is all they are used for, then we may (I use this word thoughtfully) be held under condemnation.

3)      If it is a true gift of God, and we believe it to be innate in ourselves, we are guilty of pride.

4)      If it is a true gift of God, then it must eventually be used for His purposes –to bring to pass the immortality and Eternal life of man.

 

Orson Scott Card made an interesting statement through his character Ender in one of the eponymous series.

 

We cannot take credit for simply being born with an ability any more than we can take credit for being born with a nose.  But we can take credit for what we choose to do with that ability. 

 

A gift of the Spirit is no different.  How do we use such gifts?  Is it to puff ourselves up?  Or is it to benefit others?  Is it to help bring about the immortality and Eternal life of man?