The Devil Made Me Do It?
By
Phil Scovell
Copyright (C) 1997/2003
By Phil Scovell
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction of the following is granted by the copyright holder,
Phil Scovell, if such reproduction is done in the spirit in which
it was given. It may not be reproduced and sold for financial
gain without written permission of the copyright holder: Phil
Scovell. Electronic formats may be distributed freely but this
copyright notice must remain with each copy and the text cannot
be altered in any way. For convenience, this copyright
notification may be placed at the end of the document if
reproduced electronically.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Phil Scovell
840 South Sheridan Boulevard
Denver, Colorado 80226-8017
Toll Free: 888-936-0001
Voice: 303-936-2188
Fax: 303-936-1841
Email: Phil@RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG
Web: WWW.RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG
THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT?
By
Phil Scovell
This article is in response to one entitled "Praying In
Tongues?" by Frank W. Bumpus. If the reader has not yet read his
article, please do so, if at all possible, before reading
further. Those posting this on computer bulletin boards in
electronic form are respectfully requested to allow both articles
to appear together and allow the reader to judge.
If the author of "Praying In Tongues" is by the same Frank
Bumpus with whom I am familiar, his preaching and teaching is
Godly, challenging, and worth hearing. His testimony is likewise
impeccable. I have heard him preach in the past and I appreciate
his message and ministry. His Scriptural interpretation,
however, stretches the spiritual imagination.
Brother Bumpus essentially says two things in his article on
tongues. Tongues isn't Scriptural and if anyone speaks in
tongues, it is by the power of the devil. At least that's my
interpretation of what I read.
"Since the Spirit of God is not the giver of devotional
tongues, there remains two alternatives: the human
spirit and the demonic spirit. What then is being
exercised by charismatics?"
He even lumps, apparently, all Charismatics/Pentecostals into the
same unholy ungodly barrel.
"We are also aware that communication with the spirit
world through ecstatic utterances has long been claimed
by various religions. It was practiced centuries
before Christ came and is still in effect among certain
Hindu groups, Mormons, spiritualists and others."
He forgot witches, devil worshipers, voodoolists, fire walkers,
new agers, snake charmers, satanists, transcendental
meditationists, channelers, palm readers, yogists, fortune
tellers, levitationists, astral projectionists, witch doctors,
medicine men, pyromanciests, astrologers, ufologists, and
psychics. Shoot, everybody knows Charismatics share common
doctrine with all these cult and occultists because they speak in
tongues. Right?
EITHER...OR!
Brother Bumpus begins by stating what Charismatics believe
concerning the gift of tongues and says they derive their
doctrine from I Corinthians 14:2 and 4.
"Charismatics interpret these verses to mean:
(1) tongues were used to speak to God not to man;
(2) no person could understand the tongues spoken;
(3) tongues was a devotional gift to edify the
believer."
I'm not actually sure where Brother Bumpus is getting all
his inside information on what Charismatics believe but
apparently it was from a single, unreliable, source. I could
easily make the same mistake by quoting some man from a Baptist
denomination and ascribe his remarks to all Baptists. That would
be stupid, of course, because there are dozens of Baptists
groups, some denominational and some independent, and they all
differ doctrinally. My Brother, however, apparently believes all
Charismatics believe alike. Too bad. Such an error dramatically
reduces his credibility.
Since Brother Bumpus claims Charismatics get their beliefs
from I Corinthians 14:2 and 4, perhaps this would be the
appropriate place to quote the verses. I will include verse 3 as
well.
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not
unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him;
howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he
that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and
exhortation, and comfort. He that speaketh in an
unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that
prophesieth edifieth the church.
First, he says:
"Charismatics interpret these verses to mean:
(1) tongues were used to speak to God not to man."
Charismatics do believe that tongues is a language which is
used as a (prayer language) enabling one to commune with God.
This practice of this prayer language, at least according to Paul
does edify and when employed, is speaking to God; not men.
Pastor Bumpus also states that Charismatics say:
"(2) no person could understand the tongues spoken."
He's only partially correct. Charismatics believe that the
tongues can be understood under certain conditions. Obviously
the tongues spoken by the one hundred twenty in Acts 2 were
understood because the Scriptures confirm such was the case.
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came
together, and were confounded, because that every man
heard them speak in his own language. And they were
all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another,
Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And
how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we
were born? (Acts 2:6-8).
The tongues spoken by those filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts
2:4 were plainly understood by the on-lookers because they
confessed such was true. What if those in the crowd had not
understood the tongue speakers, that is, what if the tongue
speakers were speaking languages unfamiliar to those in the
crowd? If Brother Bumpus had been one of those in the crowd and
his language had not been represented by the Spirit Filled men
and women speaking in tongues, I bet he would have said it wasn't
of the Holy Spirit. Why? Because he couldn't understand it?
Since when does the inability to understand have anything to do
with the truth of God's Holy Word? These onlookers in Acts 2 had
trouble understanding how the miracle was performed and some
concluded they must have been drunk (Acts 2:13).
As one reads the record of the apostle Paul in I Corinthians
14, it is clear that when a church service is being conducted,
tongues is not to be used to preach God's Word. The Corinthian
believers had fallen for the same old trap of the Devil, that is,
thinking they were more spiritual than others because of the
gifts God had given them. Funny, I've been a Baptist nearly all
my life and I know plenty of Baptist who think they are more
spiritual than others because they give lots of money, went to
Bible college, and win the lost to Christ. It would be
interesting to read letters written to Baptist people today by
the hand of the apostle Paul. I wonder if we might discover that
his I and II Baptist letters read similar to the Corinthians in I
and II Corinthians. Anyway, Paul corrected the Corinthians and
told them that tongues was only permitted in a church service if
it was interpreted. In this way, those unable to understand the
tongues would receive understanding via interpretation. This was
to be done by two, or at the most, by three (I Cor. 14:27). How
was the interpretation made? The same way the tongues utterance
was accomplished: by faith through one filled with the Holy
Spirit. To say, therefore, no one understands the tongue spoken
by Spirit filled men and women is incorrect. God, of course
understands it because Paul said He does: (I Cor. 14:2; 14:28).
Occasionally, there happens to be those in the service with
the ability to speak foreign languages. I have spoken in tongues
during a prayer meeting on two different occasions and there were
those who had knowledge of a language I was speaking which, I
might add, was unfamiliar to me. They later told me what I had
prayed. I have a pastor friend who was praying in tongues one
night in a prayer meeting and a visitor had come to join them in
prayer. He had never been in this church before. When the
prayer meeting was over, the visiting man introduced himself to
my pastor friend and asked him if he knew French as a second
language. He, of course, said no and wouldn't recognize French
if it were spoken in his presence. The visitor explained he was
raised in Quebec Canada and knew French. He then shared with my
friend what he had prayed.
Brother Bumpus also says that Charismatics believe:
"(3) tongues was a devotional gift to edify the
believer."
Apparently my Brother is reading a different version of the
Bible.
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not
unto men, but unto God... (I Cor. 14:2).
How plain can it be? Paul said that tongues was speaking to God
and not to men. Was Paul confused or Brother Bumpus. He is
correct, therefore, if he says that Charismatics believe tongues
is devotional in nature (I.E., for personal edification), because
Paul makes such very clear. Either speaking in tongues does
edify the one doing the speaking or it doesn't. Paul said it
does; Brother Bumpus says it doesn't.
Following this third statement, Brother Bumpus says,
"An examination of this 14th Chapter of 1 Corinthians,
reveals that these claims are not substantiated by the
context."
I give up! He's obviously reading a different Bible.
Brother Bumpus concludes his article by saying:
"We are aware that some charismatics do pray in the
manner they claim. They practice speaking in
utterances unknown to man. We are also aware that
communication with the spirit world through ecstatic
utterances has long been claimed by various religions.
It was practiced centuries before Christ came and is
still in effect among certain Hindu groups, Mormons,
spiritualists and others. The fact is, however, this
practice has no biblical basis and is not a gift of the
Holy Spirit of God. Since the Spirit of God is not the
giver of devotional tongues, there remains two
alternatives: the human spirit and the demonic spirit.
What then is being exercised by charismatics?"
I hate the way my Brother beats around the bush. Why not
come right out and say that Charismatics speak in tongues by the
power of the devil. Forget what the Bible says..."The devil made
me do it!"
End Of Document
Go To HOME: The Zeneith Tube Website: RedWhiteAndBlue.org