Receiving the Holy Ghost... non-LDS mehods?

[prisonchaplain]

JMS, your post was heartfelt, and authentic. There are many stories of Pentecostal ministers so eager to impart the gift of the Holy Spirit that the succumb to non-Scriptural, non-Spirit led techniques, such as mimicking tongues, or worse, 'teaching tongues.' Far too many seekers have been discouraged or completely turned away by well-intentioned leaders trying to "help God," (as if God needed it!!!).

If nothing else, you remind me of the awesome responsibility we carry when we accept leadership, regardless of the church.

[bert10]

PrisonChaplain.

"Bottom-line: No church that I'm aware of, only makes room for the gift of tongues to operate."

That is not exactly what I was saying. Many Christians have professed to me that they are are in the correct church because many have the gift of tongues. When I ask them about the other gifts.....nothing. The point I was making...that the display of Tongues only.....is a sign that the congregation is being deceived. For God does not give everyone the same gift.

To get back to tongues.....The interpretation can also be given by Satan.

Also, is it not weird how Televangelists who do all kinds of healing on TV except those who are missing limbs?

-----------------------------------------------------------

And thanks to the BOM we have a little bit more on this.

Moroni 10:17 - And all these gifts come by the Spirit of Christ; and they come unto every man severally, according as he will.

Moroni 10:18 - And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that every good gift cometh of Christ.

Moroni 10:19 - And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that he is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand, only according to the unbelief of the children of men.

--------------------------------------------------

And Again here the Lord Reveals more on how this is suppose to work.

D&C 46:10 - And again, verily I say unto you, I would that ye should always remember, and always retain in your minds what those gifts are, that are given unto the church.

D&C 46:11 - For all have not every gift given unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God.

D&C 46:12 - To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.

D&C 46:13 - To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.

D&C 46:14 - To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.

D&C 46:15 - And again, to some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know the differences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his mercies according to the conditions of the children of men.

D&C 46:16 - And again, it is given by the Holy Ghost to some to know the diversities of operations, whether they be of God, that the manifestations of the Spirit may be given to every man to profit withal.

I think....If all Christians would read and believe the BOM they would not be so deceived by the false teachings of men.

I hope this helps.

Peace be unto you

bert10

A word of clarification. Churches that make room for the gift of tongues would be considered "Pentecostal/Charismatic," rather than specifically Evangelical. Additionally, none that I know of teach that there is only the gift of tongues--no other manifestations. In fact Charismatic churches emphasize that tongues is only one evidence--that any of the gifts of the Spirit (prophesying, etc.) can be an evidence of Spirit baptism.

Pentecostal churches do insist that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of being baptized in the Spirit. However, if the gift is offered in the congregation, there would have to be a gift of interpretation as well. Also, we definitely see the gift of prophecy, healing, etc. in operation.

Bottom-line: No church that I'm aware of, only makes room for the gift of tongues to operate.

[jadams_4040]

I can not comprehend that idea of speaking in tongues. The gift of tongues was meant to be one of understanding...

Scriptural references seem to mean that speaking in tongues was speaking in someone else's language, that you didn't know. Huh.

Although it is a gift of God; The lord also tells us it is not representative of doing any good whatsoever when nobody can understand what we are speaking about. And when one does think about it, Who is listening and who is understanding, and who is speaking back, and what is one gaining from it? When it is nothing more than a bunch of noise coming forth from someone, whats the purpose? did God converse with the person and tell them things that are of importance and nobody else should know, Well if the be the case; so much for simply having faith huh?:)

[jms.mills]

If nothing else, you remind me of the awesome responsibility we carry when we accept leadership, regardless of the church.

That is one more reason why I am thankful none of our leaders in the church use their positions in the church as a worldly occupation. Contrast this to the many non-LDS ministers in the world that see their ministry as a "job." These ministers are given wages by the congregation. If he/she wants to keep his/her job, then he/she must produce results.

I know this is somewhat cynical, but that is exactly how many church boards view ministers. The board can hire and fire a minister as any other company would any other employee (unless, of course their is no board and the minister answers to no one -- but that is an entirely different thread). Additionally, ministers must "sell" themselves to prospective congregations when they are looking for a congregation, just as a job applicant would in any other field (including in many case an extensive "resume" of past experience/knowledge).

I believe that many ministers use speaking in tongues (or at least their ability to confer this gift upon parishioners) as a measuring stick for how well they are doing as a minister. I do not say ALL ministers see their ministry in this manner because my father, a former minister, did not conduct himself in such a selfish manner. Instead, he conducted himself like the lay ministry of Latter-Day Saints (including working full-time at a lumber mill in addition to his pastoral duties). My father simply served the Lord without regard of what he was paid, often times hurting himself financially to do so. I know there are many ministers who are like my Dad. I have great respect for men and women who truly serve God for unselfish reasons.

[prisonchaplain]

That is not exactly what I was saying. Many Christians have professed to me that they are are in the correct church because many have the gift of tongues. When I ask them about the other gifts.....nothing. The point I was making...that the display of Tongues only.....is a sign that the congregation is being deceived. For God does not give everyone the same gift.

We do believe that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of Spirit-baptism. It is not the only evidence, but it is the first evidence. And yes, the gift is available to whoever will go after it. Not everyone, by the way, that receives this gift of the Spirit will necessarily exercise it in a congregational setting, where an interpretation would be required.

To get back to tongues.....The interpretation can also be given by Satan.

Which is why we test interpretations and prophecies against the already established words of God. Also, you can't counterfeit something if there is not authentic gift.

Also, is it not weird how Televangelists who do all kinds of healing on TV except those who are missing limbs?

Do you not believe in the gift of healing? If so, perhaps the existence of a few counterfeits ought to encourage us that the real thing is available.

[bert10]

Hi Prisonchaplain....

Please correct me if I miss-quote you. Also I kinda see things way different than most folks. So bear with me.

1. You stated that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of Spirit-baptism. Okay...let us assume that God gives this gift to everyone who ask....When does one progress to the other gifts? After all Christianity has been around for the Last 1700 years. And not even a small congregation has been able to be translated into heaven yet under its teaching.

-----------------------------------------------

2. "Which is why we test interpretations and prophecies against the already established words of God. Also, you can't counterfeit something if there is not authentic gift."

Now this is what I know, one of the reason why Christ will come like a thief in the night for everyone except the Elect. Is for this reason. Private interpretation.

2 Peter 1:20 - Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

All prophecies must be interpreted by the Spirit of prophecy. And all those who have a true testimony of Jesus Christ has this Spirit for the testimony of Jesus is of this Spirit.

Revelation 19:10 - And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Because men in general shall have privately interpreted the prophecies by their wisdom and knowledge so...when Jesus comes...it will be quite a surprise..because the Lord said that they will be marrying and giving in marriage. That it would be like in the day of Noah...when only 8 of the whole world were prepared. Because only Noah received the Revelations.Do not believe?

In Jeremiah the Lord prophesied...that he would lead to Zion only One of city two of a family. How few is that? Jesus said that few there be would find the straight and narrow way.

The reason why we need the Spirit of prophecy..is because Prophecies can have multiple fulfillments as well as the meaning of the symbology changed and have already been done fulfilled unnoticed by the world.

Such as for example...Elijah having already come as it was prophesied. - One of the reasons why the Jews cannot believe their Messiah has already come because they are still awaiting this prophecy below to be fulfilled.

Malachi 4:5 - Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

They shall still be waiting for this prophecy to occur when they shall say to Jesus...

Zechariah 13:6 - And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.

Elijah has already come and delivered the keys of his dispensation.

--------------------------------------------

"Do you not believe in the gift of healing? If so, perhaps the existence of a few counterfeits ought to encourage us that the real thing is available."

Yes I do, the Lord has been good to me. I believe in all the gifts of the Spirit, including in: tasting of the heavenly gift, made partakers of the Holy Ghost, have tasted the good word of God even in the powers of the world to come.

Hebrews 6:4 - For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

Hebrews 6:5 - And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

Hebrews 6:6 - If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Peace be unto you

bert10

We do believe that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of Spirit-baptism. It is not the only evidence, but it is the first evidence. And yes, the gift is available to whoever will go after it. Not everyone, by the way, that receives this gift of the Spirit will necessarily exercise it in a congregational setting, where an interpretation would be required.

Which is why we test interpretations and prophecies against the already established words of God. Also, you can't counterfeit something if there is not authentic gift.

Do you not believe in the gift of healing? If so, perhaps the existence of a few counterfeits ought to encourage us that the real thing is available.

[prisonchaplain]

That is one more reason why I am thankful none of our leaders in the church use their positions in the church as a worldly occupation. Contrast this to the many non-LDS ministers in the world that see their ministry as a "job."

FYI: I don't view the ministry God has privileged me with as a job, despite the support I receive. Also, because I am supported, I am free to concentrate on spiritual disciplines in an intensive way, not encumbered with the need to "hunt and gather" to support my family, beyond the work God's called me to.

I say this not to argue that church-supported leaders is the only way to operate, but to say that it can be a faith-full approach, and happens to be the one most Christians find to offer the most blessing for all.

These ministers are given wages by the congregation. If he/she wants to keep his/her job, then he/she must produce results.

I know this is somewhat cynical,

Quite frankly, yes it is. Especially coming from the outside looking in. I will repeat what I've said many times here--for every carnal, money-grubbing TV-evangelist you can produce, I can find 1000s who labor for far less than they might earn from secular employ, but who do so for the glory of God.

but that is exactly how many church boards view ministers. The board can hire and fire a minister as any other company would any other employee (unless, of course their is no board and the minister answers to no one -- but that is an entirely different thread). Additionally, ministers must "sell" themselves to prospective congregations when they are looking for a congregation, just as a job applicant would in any other field (including in many case an extensive "resume" of past experience/knowledge).

I recently served on a pastoral search committee, and disagree with your assessment. Quite frankly, most on the committee did want a young middle aged family-oriented couple, with a plan for reaching the 18-35 year olds. However, through prayer, through waiting on God and listening to the Spirit, we ended up with empty-nesters, in their 50s, who brought with them such an authentic and genuine call of God--one that resonated with our Spirits, that they were warmly received.

All that to say that pastoral search committees probably operate much as the LDS calling procedure does--chosen individuals pray, seek God's face, look at talents, abilities, and track record--and trust God to bring the right people to the right callings.

I believe that many ministers use speaking in tongues (or at least their ability to confer this gift upon parishioners) as a measuring stick for how well they are doing as a minister. I do not say ALL ministers see their ministry in this manner because my father, a former minister, did not conduct himself in such a selfish manner. Instead, he conducted himself like the lay ministry of Latter-Day Saints (including working full-time at a lumber mill in addition to his pastoral duties). My father simply served the Lord without regard of what he was paid, often times hurting himself financially to do so. I know there are many ministers who are like my Dad. I have great respect for men and women who truly serve God for unselfish reasons.

I would simply say then, that the kind of minister your dad was is far more typical than the type of system you suggest is the norm.

[jms.mills]

FYI: I don't view the ministry God has privileged me with as a job, despite the support I receive. Also, because I am supported, I am free to concentrate on spiritual disciplines in an intensive way, not encumbered with the need to "hunt and gather" to support my family, beyond the work God's called me to.

I can understand that logic, but it I cannot find support for this in the scriptures (I know the argument regarding "the laborer is worthy of his hire").

Quite frankly, yes it is. Especially coming from the outside looking in. I will repeat what I've said many times here--for every carnal, money-grubbing TV-evangelist you can produce, I can find 1000s who labor for far less than they might earn from secular employ, but who do so for the glory of God.

With all due respect, you cannot simply regard my words as those of an outsider. I spent 20+ years in the churches I have described. Certainly, I am not a member of a non-LDS church now, but I do have an inside perspective to how Pentecostal churches generally conduct their meetings. Denying my perspective does not change or erase my PERSONAL, REAL LIFE experiences.

Regarding the TV-evangelists, I never mentioned them. I do not even want to touch that subject. I am speaking about the local churches, with local ministers.

I recently served on a pastoral search committee, and disagree with your assessment. Quite frankly, most on the committee did want a young middle aged family-oriented couple, with a plan for reaching the 18-35 year olds. However, through prayer, through waiting on God and listening to the Spirit, we ended up with empty-nesters, in their 50s, who brought with them such an authentic and genuine call of God--one that resonated with our Spirits, that they were warmly received.

All that to say that pastoral search committees probably operate much as the LDS calling procedure does--chosen individuals pray, seek God's face, look at talents, abilities, and track record--and trust God to bring the right people to the right callings.

I would simply say then, that the kind of minister your dad was is far more typical than the type of system you suggest is the norm.

I agree there are churches who honestly seek to do what is right. I do not deny that. What I find most troubling is the wide variety of ways in which ministers are chosen. With such inconsistency, there seems to be room for more deceit on the part of man and Satan. That is what I am trying to say.

PC: What is your interpretation of I Corinthians 14:27? How do explain the Pentecostal services where there is a public display of multiple people speaking tongues, all without interpretation?

[Hemidakota]

How many here feel the Holy Spirit at least once in a day? Just curios

[jms.mills]

I believe that I feel the Spirit daily. It is not the "overwhelming" promptings that are sometimes talked about. Instead the promptings are simple whisperings about the truthfulness of the scriptures as I read each day; as well as quiet promptings to give my wife a hug or other such things.

Each of our experiences will be different. For each of is given what we need when we need it; if we live worthy enough to receive it.

JM

[prisonchaplain]

Hi Prisonchaplain....

Please correct me if I miss-quote you. Also I kinda see things way different than most folks. So bear with me.

1. You stated that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of Spirit-baptism. Okay...let us assume that God gives this gift to everyone who ask....When does one progress to the other gifts?

Gifts come to those who seek them, always according to God's sovereignty. I would add that not everyone who receives tongues as they are baptized in the Holy Spirit will necessarily be anointed by God to speak in tongues in the congregation, so that an interpretation will follow. In Acts we see tongues as a gift for personal worship and edification. In Corinthians, the public gift of tongues is discussed. How that has played out is that the personal gift is wide spread, whereas the public gift is less so...for good reason, as you point out later on (only 2 or 3 should speak out with public tongues in a service).

I've personally exercised the public gift of tongues, interpretation, and prophecy.

-----------------------------------------------

2. I've not addressed point #2 because I do not understand it. I pointed out that any prophecy or interpretation of tongues is subject to testing. We do so by already established scripture, and, simply by the gift of discernment. The material you provided about private interpretations etc.--I'm not sure how you mean it.

3. I'm glad we agree about healing.

[prisonchaplain]

I can understand that logic, but it I cannot find support for this in the scriptures (I know the argument regarding "the laborer is worthy of his hire").

Well, that actually is the primary one. Also, the pattern from the Old Testament--and there's no reason to assume this is changed--is that the priests and leaders were supported. Also, there are offerings taken in the New Testament for work being done elsewhere. Then, of course, there are Paul's defenses of his unusual decision not to take money from the Corinthians, but to be bivocational, earning his keep from tentmaking. Paul explains why he chose to do so in this particular case, showing that such was not the norm. Granted, I'm drawing conclusions, but Paul appears to assume that most churches provided for their leaders.

With all due respect, you cannot simply regard my words as those of an outsider. I spent 20+ years in the churches I have described. Certainly, I am not a member of a non-LDS church now, but I do have an inside perspective to how Pentecostal churches generally conduct their meetings. Denying my perspective does not change or erase my PERSONAL, REAL LIFE experiences.

I responded to yoru post point by point, and did not catch your personal experience until later in the post. Further, it is still true that you have embraced a church that officially disapproves of paid ministry, and sees such as part of unrestored Christianity, labeling it "priestcraft" (which seems to have a somewhat perjorative flavor to it). So, I do not deny your experience, nor do I deny pastoral searches are often carried out in fleshly, non-anointed ways. However, I'm doubtful that any system of church governance can protect against impure motives. See my signature line for an understanding of why.

Regarding the TV-evangelists, I never mentioned them. I do not even want to touch that subject. I am speaking about the local churches, with local ministers.

Well then, I'm a confused. Most ministers earn modest wages, but great heavenly rewards. There are far more lucrative ways to earn money, considering the education required, the work and the hours. We do it because we're called, and gratified to offer humble service to our LORD.

I agree there are churches who honestly seek to do what is right. I do not deny that. What I find most troubling is the wide variety of ways in which ministers are chosen. With such inconsistency, there seems to be room for more deceit on the part of man and Satan. That is what I am trying to say.

As long as humans populate our churches the struggle between seeking the direction, will, anointing of the Holy Spirit, and the reality of carnal humans who seek power and status will remain a tension. Wheat & tares.

PC: What is your interpretation of I Corinthians 14:27? How do explain the Pentecostal services where there is a public display of multiple people speaking tongues, all without interpretation?

If more than three people speak out in public tongues, followed by interpretations, then confusion results, as this passage says. The command of Paul is to stay orderly. That some, during corporate worship, might quietly pray in personal tongues does not violate the spirit of that passage. Nevertheless, to be safe, some churches discourage any tongues that are not followed by an interpretation, during corporate worship.

[jms.mills]

I responded to yoru post point by point, and did not catch your personal experience until later in the post. Further, it is still true that you have embraced a church that officially disapproves of paid ministry, and sees such as part of unrestored Christianity, labeling it "priestcraft" (which seems to have a somewhat perjorative flavor to it). So, I do not deny your experience, nor do I deny pastoral searches are often carried out in fleshly, non-anointed ways. However, I'm doubtful that any system of church governance can protect against impure motives. See my signature line for an understanding of why.

I understand what you are saying (and how it may appear), but I had doubts about a paid ministry long before becoming LDS. I agree with you 100%. As long as there are humans involved and Satan has influence in this world, there will be impure motives in any system used by man (even those instituted by God). I simply find the open ended, generally unstructured ways in which non-LDS churches call their ministers easily infiltrated by impostors. For example: How many non-denominational churches are organized by one man, with no checks and balances a pastoral selection committee can provide?

Well then, I'm a confused. Most ministers earn modest wages, but great heavenly rewards. There are far more lucrative ways to earn money, considering the education required, the work and the hours. We do it because we're called, and gratified to offer humble service to our LORD.

I agree on the following points: 1) There are much easier ways to make money (see below). 2) Many do serve as ministers because they genuinely care about the people in their congregation.

I disagree on the following: 1) Ministers do not need to be "educated" in the traditional sense. Sure, some ministers go to seminary or other such formal studies. I know many pastors whose only religious education was a mail-order course which lasted a few months, in my experience this was more the rule than the exception, particularly among the Pentecostal churches. 2) Monetary rewards, as well as heavenly rewards are not the only motivating factors involved. These can include: pride, a sense of power/influence over a group of people, or prestige the title of pastor can bring. I am not saying every minister succumbs each of these social ills, but it cannot be denied they are motivating factors.

Here is the general difference, at least in my mind, between LDS churches and non-LDS churches in regards minister selection: LDS ministers do not solicit themselves for the roles to which they are called (although I am sure it has happened); whereas non-LDS ministers generally make an individual decision (whether the person feels called of God or simply decides ministry might be a good occupation) to pursue a position in the ministry. That is a huge distinction.

As long as humans populate our churches the struggle between seeking the direction, will, anointing of the Holy Spirit, and the reality of carnal humans who seek power and status will remain a tension. Wheat & tares.

Agreed. Even more reason to have a more secure selection process to determine the shepherd of the Lord's church.

If more than three people speak out in public tongues, followed by interpretations, then confusion results, as this passage says. The command of Paul is to stay orderly. That some, during corporate worship, might quietly pray in personal tongues does not violate the spirit of that passage. Nevertheless, to be safe, some churches discourage any tongues that are not followed by an interpretation, during corporate worship.

I know that is the way it is supposed to work. However, I do not recall ever hearing a minister reprove members because they spoke in tongues in a manner contrary to Paul's teaching. In fact my experience shows that the opposite is true. Pastors, as well as the general congregation, would comment on how great a service was if there were many people speaking in tongues during a "revival" meeting or "alter call" or other such times of spiritual excitement. Keep in mind I have witnessed this series of event in multiple churches, cities, and even countries.

JM

[Elphaba]

Pastors, as well as the general congregation, would comment on how great a service was if there were many people speaking in tongues during a "revival" meeting or "alter call" or other such times of spiritual excitement.

As did the earliest members of the LDS Church.

First instance, 1829

The spirit came upon Brother sherman in mighty power, and he opened his mouth in an unknown tongue, to the great surprise and joy of all, … being the first known to have spoken in the gift of tongues by the power of God in this dispensation.

New York, 1832

Heber C. Kimball

First in New York Brother Ezra Landan preached in Avon and Genesee, baptized eighteen or twenty, and being afraid to confirm them and promise the Holy Ghost, he requested me to confirm, them, which I did according to the best of my knowledge, pronouncing but a few words on the head of each one, and invariably saying, "receive ye the Holy Ghost in the name of Jesus Christ." Immediately the Holy Ghost fell upon them and several commenced speaking in tongues before they arose from their knees, and we had a joyful time; some ten or twelve spoke in tongues, neither of whom had ever heard any person speak in tongues, they being the first baptized in that place.

Joseph and others speak sing and pray

1833

Joseph Smith speaks in tongues, opening a two-day conference, followed by Zebedee Coltrin. All elders and many members, male and female, experience the gift, including singing and praying in tongues.

John Murdock to Salmon Gee

February 11, 1833

Columbia Branch, Brigham Young and Joseph Smith in Kirtland Pennsylvania. I took my horses and sleigh and started for Pennsylvania; Brigham and Phinehas Young and their wives went along with me. We stayed with the Church there about six days, attended their meetings, heard them speak in tongues, interpret and prophecy, which truly caused us to rejoice and praise the Lord. We received the gift of tongues and interpretation a few days after we were baptized. The brethren who brought the Gospel to us belonged to the first Branch of the Church that received the gift of tongues, and the Branch at Mendon was the next.

May 1833

Gideon H. Carter

In the first place I must give you some idea of the churches: The church at Kirtland is sharing bountifully in the blessings of the Lord, and many have the gift of tongues and some the interpretation thereof.

Brigham speaks in tongues, First experience for Joseph

We saw Brother Joseph Smith and had a glorious time; during which Brother Brigham spoke in tongues before Brother Joseph, it being the first time he had heard any one speak in tongues; he testified that the gift was from God, and spoke in tongues himself. Soon the gift of tongues became general in the Church in Kirtland. We had a precious season and returned with a blessing in our souls.

October 1833

Sister in Canada

Joseph, Sidney, and Freeman return to Mount Pleasant, Upper Canada [Ontario] on October 24th. Joseph finds the people "very superstitious." But on Sunday the 27th they begin baptizing—twelve on Sunday, two on Monday. "One of the sisters got the gift of tongues which made the saints rejoice may God increse the gifts among them for his sons sake

May 1836John and Leonore Taylor, others in Toronto

Shortly after baptism, John and Leonore Taylor speak in tongues, as do others of Parley Pratt's converts. (The Fieldings do not

January 1837

Layman Sherman

Wilford estimates fifteen hundred people assembled at the House of the Lord in Kirtland for Sunday meeting. Elder Sherman in Kirtland House of the Lord Their was two discourses deliverd from the Aaronic Priesthood one from Councellor Knight & the other from Priest Willey. Priest Willey had much of the spirit of God in Preaching to the Church after breaking bread Elder Sherman Sung in the gift of tongues & proclaimed great & marvelous things while clothed upon by the power & spirit of God. … Lyman Sherman: At Bishop Whitney's I spent the evening with Priest Turpin at Bishop Whitney's. Had a vary happy time in speaking Singing hearing & interpeting tongues & in prayer with the family.

Mary Elizabeth Rollins LightnerAt publishing of Book of Commandments

Oliver Cowdery, John Whitmer and Thomas B. Marsh often spoke in tongues in addressing the people on the Sabbath day, and I wanted to understand what they said; so I made it a subject of prayer, that the Lord would give me to understand what was the meaning of their words; for they seemed to speak with great power. One evening the brethren came to Uncle's house to converse upon the revelations that had not been printed as yet, but few had looked upon them, for they were in large sheets, not folded. They spoke of them with such reverence, as coming from the Lord; they felt to rejoice that they were counted worthy to be the means of publishing them for the benefit of the whole world. While talking they were filled with the spirit and spoke in tongues. I was called upon to interpret it. I felt the spirit of it in a moment.

January 17, 1836

WW Phelps

Kirtland leaders speak, sing, prophesy … the presidents commenced the meeting by confessing their sins and forgiving their brethren and the world. … The Lord poured out his Spirit in such a manner as you never witnessed. When I was speaking, which was but few words, the Spirit of the Lord came upon me so that I could not speak, and I cried as little children cry in earnest and the tears from my eyes ran in streams; the audience, which was the largest ever convened in the said room, sobbed and wept aloud. The presidency and the "Twelve" occupied the forenoon. There was speaking and singing in tongues, and prophesying, as on the day of Pentecost.

A report of missionaries:

Eliel Strong's and Eleazer Miller's letter to the Evening and Morning Star, refers to "several of us" going to , Mendon, where "the work of the Lord commenced." From Mendon they went to Warsaw, Lake Erie, and Angelica, "preaching the word, and blessed be the name of the Lord, signs followed them that believed, insomuch that some who were sick was healed, and some spake with tongues and glorified God."

March 1839Benjamin F. Johnson, Zina Huntington

Zina and her mother were much devoted to their religion. And often at mother Huntington's did we have the most spirited and enjoyable testimony or prayer meetings.

There the gift of tongues came to me in power, and never has it left me. To sister Zina was both the gift of tongues and interpretation also, and under the influence of spiritual enjoyment it seemed we formed a mutual attachment, which before I left Far West grew into feelings of reciprocal love, with hopes, which although not realized in full did not hinder our being ever the warmest and truest of friends.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is true eventually the Church came to define "Speaking in Tongues," as a tool for missionaries.

However, members of the Church, including Joseph, enjoyed "Speaking in Tongues" quite a bit, from the Church's inception and for a decade or more.

Apparently it worked for them at the time. Who are you to criticize someone who tells you it works for him today?

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

duplicate

[Jenamarie]

Elphaba is correct, the "traditional" use of tongues (not sure what else to call it ) was pretty active at the beginning of the church. I don't think the use of tongues as a "proof" of how Spiritual a meeting is is always inaccurate, but I do sometimes wonder why it seems to be the one that gets the most attention in other churches? I've heard several of my Christian friends talk about recieving the gift of tongues on several occasions, but not much talk about the other Gifts of the Spirit. (maybe I ought to ask them next time, perhaps they just aren't mentioning them)

I think I would have to be in the same room to understand if someone speaking tongues is really feeling the Spirit or not. It IS a gift that can be easily faked, IMO. But I do not deny that the Spirit can and does work within other churches. God wants to bless ALL of His Children who are honestly trying to seek him.

[jms.mills]

Apparently it worked for them at the time. Who are you to criticize someone who tells you it works for him today?

If a person is truly uplifted from a spiritual experience (receiving the gift of tongues for example) I am happy for that person. I am simply stating why this 'method' did not "work" for me.

Here is where I disagree with the current usage of the gift of tongues in non-LDS churches:

1) I have a problem with the overemphasis many churches place on the gift of tongues (I know this is one man's opinion).

2) I have issue with men/women who try to "teach" the gift of tongues (i.e. outright fraud in some cases).

3) I cannot agree with the way in which some ministers use the gift of tongues to further a selfish agenda (i.e. promising congregations that he/she can help a person receive the Holy Spirit/speak in tongues, while at the same time asking for donations to help his/her ministry).

I realize that the above list does not apply to every church, individual minister, etc. The criticisms are intended to be general in nature. These observations come from personal experience. Are these statements critical of many current practices of speaking in tongues/receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost of some churches? Yes. Am I allowed to criticize? Yes.

I am simply relating my opinion regarding the gift of tongues/Holy Ghost as practiced in many Pentecostal churches. These methods did not "work" for me. And, I was curious to see how members of the churches would respond to these criticisms.

There could be several responses after reading my comments:1) disregard them as nonsense. 2) Read them and be convinced to a greater degree that one's personal beliefs are truth. 3) Realize that there is a better way. Whatever a person's response, critical statements are a crucial part of any constructive dialog.

If anyone is personally offended I am sorry. I sincerely hold all seekers of truth in high regard.

JMS

[jms.mills]

I do not deny that the Spirit can and does work within other churches. God wants to bless ALL of His Children who are honestly trying to seek him.

Agreed!

[VisionOfLehi]

I felt the Holy Ghost as I was searching for God. I wasn't even a deist of any sort at the time, nor Christian. But I wanted and needed to know.

I felt it another time, very strongly, before I joined the Church.

So, it doesn't just work within churches, but the individual.

[prisonchaplain]

First, let me say to all that I appreciate JMS.Mills. The posts are based in experience, and, imho a genuine desire for more righteousness in church governance.

I simply find the open ended, generally unstructured ways in which non-LDS churches call their ministers easily infiltrated by impostors. For example: How many non-denominational churches are organized by one man, with no checks and balances a pastoral selection committee can provide?

I personally agree, and believe that God approves of the denominational structures, in that there is wisdom in many counselors. I do not condemn nondenominational churches, but find their claim to avoiding divisiveness by remaining unaffiliated uncompelling.

I disagree on the following: 1) Ministers do not need to be "educated" in the traditional sense. Sure, some ministers go to seminary or other such formal studies. I know many pastors whose only religious education was a mail-order course which lasted a few months, in my experience this was more the rule than the exception, particularly among the Pentecostal churches.

While it's true that in most districts, a bit over two years of correspondence study (college level--not diploma mill) can suffice, I'd say the normal is a four-year course of study, and that the majority of our ministers studied at a residential school.

2) Monetary rewards, as well as heavenly rewards are not the only motivating factors involved. These can include: pride, a sense of power/influence over a group of people, or prestige the title of pastor can bring. I am not saying every minister succumbs each of these social ills, but it cannot be denied they are motivating factors.

Power tends to corrupt . . . but most ministers follow the servant-leadership model, established by Jesus. Perhaps most bishops do too?

Here is the general difference, at least in my mind, between LDS churches and non-LDS churches in regards minister selection: LDS ministers do not solicit themselves for the roles to which they are called (although I am sure it has happened); whereas non-LDS ministers generally make an individual decision (whether the person feels called of God or simply decides ministry might be a good occupation) to pursue a position in the ministry. That is a huge distinction.

The majority of Christian churches appoint ministers. However, my own, and Baptists, do elect them. Nevertheless, we see the process as both the clergyperson and the congregation praying for divine direction, and both coming to agree on the calling. I've heard of ministers refusing an acceptance because 10% voted no. They did not sense unity, and felt God was not approving, despite the "legal victory."

Agreed. Even more reason to have a more secure selection process to determine the shepherd of the Lord's church.

I'm not opposed to centralized pastoral placement, but am not convinced that God mandates that versus the congregational-selection system.

I know that is the way it is supposed to work. However, I do not recall ever hearing a minister reprove members because they spoke in tongues in a manner contrary to Paul's teaching. In fact my experience shows that the opposite is true. Pastors, as well as the general congregation, would comment on how great a service was if there were many people speaking in tongues during a "revival" meeting or "alter call" or other such times of spiritual excitement. Keep in mind I have witnessed this series of event in multiple churches, cities, and even countries.

Okay, but are you saying that these people prayed in tongues out loud, and that everyone quieted themselves, and then an interpretation came, and that this happened too many times??? Or, are you saying that people were praying in personal tongues out loud for personal edification? Because, in the latter case, since there was no indication that the tongues was meant to provoke an interpretation, it sounds like you witnessed a lot of people praying at once, in tongues. You will also find in our churches that a lot of people will pray out loud in English, in response to a call to prayer. We call this corporate prayer. It is not considered chaotic or confusing, because this is not a time when a message from God is being waited for. Paul's admonition was against multiple messages being given--two or three were enough.

[Vanhin]

I like you prisonchaplain. Have I ever told you that before?

I had an experience once while I was a missionary where our whole district (4 Elders in this case) was invited to attend a charismatic church meeting by someone we had met. We met her there and found a seat and sat down.

It seemed nice enough, to tell you the truth. The minister picked up the mic and welcomed everyone there, and just kind of slipped in to a prayer. He bowed his head and began to pray. We followed suit, because we also pray like that. His words seemed somewhat rehearsed, but no big deal. Then in the middle of the prayer, someone strummed a bass guitar. I was startled and looked up just in time for the rest of the band to kick in. It was incredible. The prayer turned into a sermon of sorts, and we heard laughter, and noises all around us. I looked around to see people shaking like they had epilepsy, or some with their eyes rolled into that back of their head with their hands stretched out like they were trying to receive energy from somewhere. I saw others holding their hands over peoples head, but not touching, and others babbling nonsense. At that point all four of us stood up just so we could get a better look. Our friend who invited us came to us and said something like, "Isn't it great!", and then her whole head would twitch. All the while the band kept jamming...

I don't mean to be rude by saying this, but it did not feel like the Holy Ghost in there. It felt like a rock concert. That was the feeling. It was hyped up, and didn't seem reverent at all. This lasted for a few minutes, and then it calmed down and the sermon slowed down as well. The music kept going, but much like the trance inducing parts of a Pink Floyd song. Honestly, it was awful. My companions and I thanked our host, and got the heck out of there.

We went out and talked to people about the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, by authority and by the Spirit. Two of us were half-Finns (yours truly included), so we knew the language pretty well before our missions, but the other two also taught by power in their non-native toungue of Finnish. This was the true gift of tongues in action.

Regards,

Vanhin

[prisonchaplain]

Discernment of spirits is a gift. Sometimes an alleged anointing can be hyped and "in the flesh" as we say. Other times it is real, but manifested in ways that we are unused to. Probably the most touching for me (being somewhat used to the type of service you described), was a Bible study that led into worship...and became hushed. A holy silence came upon us, and for 20 minutes we were just quiet before God. That was 1993, but I'll never forget it!

[Vanhin]

Discernment of spirits is a gift. Sometimes an alleged anointing can be hyped and "in the flesh" as we say. Other times it is real, but manifested in ways that we are unused to. Probably the most touching for me (being somewhat used to the type of service you described), was a Bible study that led into worship...and became hushed. A holy silence came upon us, and for 20 minutes we were just quiet before God. That was 1993, but I'll never forget it!

I do believe that the gifts of the Spirit can be made manifest to people according to their faith, LDS and non-LDS alike. Here's what Moroni taught about the subject. It's kind of long, but I think you will appreciate it:

7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.

8 And again, I exhort you, my brethren, that ye deny not the gifts of God, for they are many; and they come from the same God. And there are different ways that these gifts are administered; but it is the same God who worketh all in all; and they are given by the manifestations of the Spirit of God unto men, to profit them.

9 For behold, to one is given by the Spirit of God, that he may teach the word of wisdom;

10 And to another, that he may teach the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

11 And to another, exceedingly great faith; and to another, the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

12 And again, to another, that he may work mighty miracles;

13 And again, to another, that he may prophesy concerning all things;

14 And again, to another, the beholding of angels and ministering spirits;

15 And again, to another, all kinds of tongues;

16 And again, to another, the interpretation of languages and of divers kinds of tongues.

17 And all these gifts come by the Spirit of Christ; and they come unto every man severally, according as he will.

18 And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that every good gift cometh of Christ.

19 And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that he is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand, only according to the unbelief of the children of men. (Moroni 10:7-19)

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[jms.mills]

I personally agree, and believe that God approves of the denominational structures, in that there is wisdom in many counselors. I do not condemn nondenominational churches, but find their claim to avoiding divisiveness by remaining unaffiliated uncompelling.

That goes back to the question that Joseph Smith had: Which church (denomination) is true? I, like Joseph Smith (not saying I am a prophet), found the in-fighting among denominations discouraging. I knew Christ's church was was supposed to be unified. Sure, there is a general consensus that Salvation comes through Christ, but discourse regarding the other "unessential" doctrine seems to be an exercise of "the left hand does not knowing what the right hand is doing."

While it's true that in most districts, a bit over two years of correspondence study (college level--not diploma mill) can suffice, I'd say the normal is a four-year course of study, and that the majority of our ministers studied at a residential school.

If I may ask, to which denomination do you belong?

Power tends to corrupt . . . but most ministers follow the servant-leadership model, established by Jesus. Perhaps most bishops do too?

Yes... a bishop does serve as a servant-leader. There are many patterns in the Bible as well as the Book of Mormon that would indicate that a minister of God be a servant as well as a leader.

I've heard of ministers refusing an acceptance because 10% voted no. They did not sense unity, and felt God was not approving, despite the "legal victory."

Huzzah, for honest men!

Okay, but are you saying that these people prayed in tongues out loud, and that everyone quieted themselves, and then an interpretation came, and that this happened too many times???

Yes, this happened many times, but I do not have an issue with this manifestation/practice of speaking in tongues. This practice seems to be used in accordance with Paul's instructions.

Or, are you saying that people were praying in personal tongues out loud for personal edification? Because, in the latter case, since there was no indication that the tongues was meant to provoke an interpretation, it sounds like you witnessed a lot of people praying at once, in tongues. You will also find in our churches that a lot of people will pray out loud in English, in response to a call to prayer. We call this corporate prayer. It is not considered chaotic or confusing, because this is not a time when a message from God is being waited for. Paul's admonition was against multiple messages being given--two or three were enough.

I can see the logic in this statement.

I could be wrong (a human frailty...). If quiet, reverent corporate prayer in tongues was the only group expression of the gift of tongues, I could find that acceptable. It is quite another to make a spectacle with the gift of tongues. I attended Pentecostal churches where people would yell, scream and be overly loud while speaking in tongues. The above happening following an "alter call." I could not and cannot find such a practice taught or illustrated in the New Testament.

[prisonchaplain]

That goes back to the question that Joseph Smith had: Which church (denomination) is true? I, like Joseph Smith (not saying I am a prophet), found the in-fighting among denominations discouraging. I knew Christ's church was was supposed to be unified. Sure, there is a general consensus that Salvation comes through Christ, but discourse regarding the other "unessential" doctrine seems to be an exercise of "the left hand does not knowing what the right hand is doing."

So many new denominations are started because a person gets frustrated with the divisions, and so creates another one. I'm Assemblies of God, my best friend is Southern Baptist, and my undergraduate work was at a Presbyterian college. One of my favorite religious volunteers at the jail is Church of Christ, and the guy I often ask to fill in for me when I'm out of town is Word of Faith. In glory they'll all find out that I was right, and we'll laugh about it together. (j/k!)

The days of denominational flag waving are largely over. Many denominational churches have even taken the tag out of their names. For example, First Assembly of God becomes Christian Family Center, etc.

So, I understand Smith's original frustration--and the divisions were more heated in his day--but believe the trouble of it is largely gone.