Nazarene Space

Does the messianic community practice the tongue like Pentecost or Charismatic? ( sorry if my English language less, i usually speak Indonesia )

Views: 315

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


Looks like we are coming to a consensus at last. I agree that Nazarene's were likely at times called X-tian by unknowing/without understanding persons.

It's your use of the term "Jews" that we may yet not agree on. I'm not contending that it's an improper term, only that it appears you are encompassing a large (...and many "so called") group of people in to one impossible to define group. If your using verse 19 to say some "Jews", in Antioch did not believe, I am of the opinion the one chapter we are discussing  is a bit to vague to assert any one "Jew" or Gentile then/there shunned hearing the Word. 

Glad you have gathered "all you wanted to know" concerning speaking/praying in tongues. Right, I don't pray out loud seeking an interpreter as is done, precariously and unscripturally IMO in some Kirtches. I have ran into a few X-tians that attempt to use 1 Tim 5:17 to teach "continual prayer". (Yep, believe it, or not!)


Yes, as mentioned already, the term “Christians” seems to have been used by ignorant people, and in a scornful way. However, I would emphasize that the original derogatory term was a Hebrew one: Mashiachim, i.e., Messianics (it seems they were mocking the little Messiahs).

I’m not sure if it’s worthwhile to argue about ACTS 11:26, since we’ve seen in ACTS 26:28 and 1 PET 4:16 that Jewish and Gentile Nazarenes were derided as Messianics.

The blog’s statement that “the New Testament does not call Jewish believers Christians” is simply false. How can “the disciples [who] were first called Christians in Antioch” exclusively consist of Gentiles with Saul & Barnabas among them? It smells of some silly elitist demeanor, “Look at us, we have not been defiled by Gentile terms” – stupid (sorry).

Well, I wanted to know whether you speak in tongues out of personal interest (and after all it’s the initial subject), and your explanation showed that you don’t speak in tongues.

If you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, because some people (whether Christians or Nazarenes) teach nonsense, then you are free to do so obviously.

In ACTS no one is looking for an interpreter because tongues confirm the infilling of the Holy Spirit. My wife and I pray every day in the Spirit (ideally); it’s our private prayer time.

To operate the spiritual gifts at a gathering is different, and there’s BTW nothing precarious or unscriptural about it. If gifts are used, one usually operates 2-3 tongues with interpretations, which may be followed by 2-3 prophecies:

1 COR 14:27, 29 (KJV):

If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

I was once queuing to get onto the Temple Mount, and started chatting to some ‘pastor’ in front of me (he was from the Bible Belt). We were talking about Daniel, prophecies, etc., and at one point I mentioned that I speak in tongues. He just laughed at me and said, “That can’t be, no one speaks in tongues today, that only happened in ACTS.” Thus he confirmed:

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. (1 COR 14:21, KJV)

Funny, isn’t it?

Quote: Well, I wanted to know whether you speak in tongues out of personal interest (and after all it’s the initial subject), and your explanation showed that you don’t speak in tongues.

If a persons prayer utterances are not audible can anyone say the person is not praying?

Hi Mikha,

No, of course not - no one can say that (a good example in the Tanakh is Hannah).

As Elohim sees our heart/thoughts, one can pray surely also inwardly, but the initial question referred to "praying in tongues".

Why were the believing Jews surprised that also the Gentiles had received the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh?

"Because they heard them speak with tongues" (ACTS 10:46). The book of ACTS shows that this was the audible (and visible) sign of the baptism with the Ruach HaKodesh, i.e., with fire, like mentioned in ACTS 2:4 and predicted by John the Baptist:

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire (MATT 3:11). 

Speaking/praying in tongues, or praying in the Spirit is all synonymous, and it is a distinct supernatural language which is given miraculously the moment you receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh. One can control the volume & speed of the language, but one cannot control the syllables. At other times it is described as "rivers of living water coming out of your belly/innermost being", or as "the refreshing", etc.

BTW, I am not saying that, because you don't speak in tongues, that you haven't received the Holy Spirit. I've baptised my sister-in-law a few months ago, and she doesn't speak in tongues. Nevertheless, I am convinced that she has received. I think it's some kind of blockage as the mind usually says "this is impossible". There can be different reasons, but standard procedure is that the infilling of the Holy Spirit is evidenced by speaking in a new a language (from one second to another).

It's a prayer language so to say. I don't understand what I pray when I pray in the Spirit, but Elohim understands (and I pray according to His will).

It's a bit difficult to explain in a few words.

Am at work and have to finish off now. 


Hi Mikha, what is your background if I may ask? Are you Jewish?

Quote: (myself)
Regarding the term, "Jews". Many ask me that. Someone the other day, "How was your X-Mass", Me: "I don't do X-Mass I keep Chaunakh". Next question, "Are you Jewish". My reply, "Why, ..which type of being Jewish are you referring too"? The question remains unanswered due to my reluctance to answer yes being completely unaware of what the term "Jew" might mean to them! Instead I ask them, "Do you believe scripture"? This way I can defer letting them know, until they are ready to hear it, that scripture, which they normally SAY they believe, requires a conversion! (Some around here will differ with me on this point but it is so, regardless of anyone's opinion).

I said this in my 2nd or 3rd reply. If you wish to pursue this question further perhaps an alternate thread would be appropriate?

Hi Mikha,

I don't suppose you are secular, and I simply meant ethnically Jewish and/or spiritually? - for me, it's the latter (Romans 2:29).   

As per Yochanan 3:5 and Acts 2:38, conversion entails being born again of water & spirit (immersed in both), which leads us back to the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh manifested in tongues whenever [ethnical] Jews or Gentiles were converted (Acts 2:4; Acts 10:45-46).

So, the question seems to be closely connected to tongues, don't you think?

"Ethnically or Spiritually Jewish" is too vague IMO. Yes closely related yet a different topic. I vote for an alternate thread as this one is too lengthy again, IMO.

Reply to Discussion













© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service