The Sign of Tongues Has Ceased

In this video, Dr. Scott Aniol explores the biblical teaching on the gift of tongues, explaining how this miraculous gift-properly understood as the gift of languages-was given as a sign of Spirit baptism. He delves into the purpose of this gift in the early church, specifically how it pointed to the unity of all believers, Jew and Gentile, in the body of Christ. Dr. Aniol further examines the scriptural basis for the cessation of the gift of tongues, arguing that it fulfilled its purpose and is no longer in operation today.
Join Dr. Aniol as he carefully walks through key passages in the New Testament to clarify the role of tongues in redemptive history and why it is not a normative practice in the church today.
Key Topics:
• The biblical definition of tongues as languages
• Tongues as a sign of Spirit baptism and unity in the church
• Scriptural evidence for the cessation of tongues
• Why tongues are no longer a normative gift for the church
Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share for more biblically grounded teaching on the church, worship, and Christian living!
#SpiritualGifts #Cessationism #GiftOfTongues #SpiritBaptism #BiblicalTheology #ScottAniol #ChristianDoctrine #ReformedTheology #ChurchUnity
Scott Aniol's blog:
g3min.org/blog...
Article, audio, itinerary:
www.scottaniol...
Podcast:
anchor.fm/scot...
Facebook:
/ scottmaniol
Twitter:
/ scottaniol
Instagram:
/ scottmaniol

[@dwhizzel6471]

Amen! Sunscribed, nice video man.

[@Eloign]

Meanwhile Pentecostal/Charismatic Christianity is and has been the fastest growing segment of Christianity for almost a 100 years now. So carry on man. God is going to keep doing what He's doing.

[@jasonmiller3943]

I was 10 minutes in before i realized this guy is serious, this is not a parody, he really believes this stuff. Fn hilarious! Good job! I could watch someone speaking in tounges all day.

[@real.revJosva]

The closest thing I've seen to actually being able to speak in tongues, in the biblical sense, is that British woman who got hit in the head and started speaking in a Chinese accent, after never having ever been in China.

[@Chris-jr9eh]

I wonder if we will see the gift of tongues work with non contacted tribes that many do not know the language.

[@Tom-yo7zf]

Preaching against the Holy Ghost.

[@ScottAniol]

No, I'm actually concerned that people glorify the Spirit for what he is actually doing today.

[@didiudoaffah4359]

Bro, this is so true, biblically faithful submission of “tongues”. Like Dr. Scott said in conclusion, let’s focus on God rather than on His gifts

[@isaacbell5865]

@@didiudoaffah4359 while focusing on God you may hear the Spirits call to pursue spiritual gifts as outlined in Corinthians . The great love chapter is smack in the middle of spiritual gifts . Think about it - what’s more loving that you say desiring a gift of healing and getting it to then gift that to those in need ? God gives us power and love and self control !

[@real.revJosva]

Speaking in gibberish is not speaking in tongues.

[@isaacbell5865]

"I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you." - Paul the Apostle You say "if there was a language of Angels, linguistic experts would be able to recognize it as a language" - mate how many heavenly experts do you know? Bro what a wet blanket this video is xD we should desire the spiritual gifts! You err in your thoughts my friend. It's a spiritual language. The spiritual gifts are the Spirits love language to the world my friend

[@therightduck6258]

Why do you have to make the assumption that angelic languages are completely foreign to the concept of language as we know it? Do you have anything to prove this?

[@naderz4064]

Tongues was speaking in all languages and not sounding possessed

[@real.revJosva]

Yes. Speaking in a foreign language you didn't formerly know so that you could spread the gospel to foreign nations. Gibberish is not tongues.

[@chadwickg323]

I guarantee you didn’t listen to more then 1 min of what he said. Maybe listen first and than call out what you believe was false. Not all saved believers speak in tongues. If it were a prerequisite for being saved it would be mentioned in that way. It was called a “gift “. We are all given different “gifts”. This is not a salvation issue. Not loving others the way He tells us to IS

[@hermangroenewald8751]

Preaching False doctrine is also a sin.......speaking gibberish and calling it the Holy Spirit is blasphemy....

[@chadwickg323]

@@hermangroenewald8751 Sometimes people ARE speaking “gibberish”. There may be some with the actual gift, but not everyone has it. “False doctrine” is preaching a diffent gospel (different Jesus) Not getting theology wrong or having a misunderstanding of gifts. I will say, that if someone preaches you must speak in tongues to be saved.. THAT is a diffent gospel. And that would be damming. If you believe that, it is YOU that needs to wake up and repent for following man and not scripture

[@hermangroenewald8751]

@@chadwickg323 I did not say false gospel....I said false doctrine......read carefully what I said.

[@chadwickg323]

@@hermangroenewald8751 We just see way too many Christians bashing other Christians in today’s world. It’s not what Jesus wanted. “They will know you by your love for one another”. No one has the perfect church, and we all may differ on certain things, but we should he able to love each other first and foremost. If some cult attacks the actual gospel, that’s completely different and must be called out. Unbelievers are seeing all this arguing, and trust me, it’s one of the biggest tools satan is using to cause confusion in people. It needs to stop

[@johnfagan-dc2rh]

Jesus Christ,the same,yesterday and forever.( Hebrews 13v8) Has God changed from His scriptures??? NO!!! Then this man is absolut a heretic. Read ALLof 1 Corinthians 13...

[@maryhirst9127]

To n gues is a gift of the holy spirit not everyone had the gift

[@alexanderh2345]

Speaking in tongues is the evidence you have the Holy Ghost. Receiving the Holy Ghost comes before any of the 9 gifts of the Spirit. That’s why Paul said there are a multitude of gifts but it’s the same Spirit. You false teachers have relegated tongues to nothing more than the gift of tongues and because you aren’t filled with the Holy Ghost you don’t speak on tongues at all. Now you demand that everyone believe that tongues has ceased. Does God change? No. But man frequently changes. You cannot show ONE verse of Scripture where God ever establishes another way of salvation outside of the Acts 2 experience. You can deny it all you want, but I speak in tongues because I’m full of the Holy Ghost, and there are tens of millions more like me. You’re doing the devil’s work by propagating these lies. You ought to repent and be converted. In Jesus name.

[@ScottAniol]

So you speak in a known human language you've never known before?

[@alexanderh2345]

@@ScottAniol It is a heavenly language, and it’s not me speaking but the Spirit of God speaking through me just as it says in Acts 2:4. What amazes me is that you will still call it made up or devil talk or just incoherent blabbering, yet it is the fulfillment of Scripture. Joel 2:28 and Isaiah 28:11. You could receive this undeniable experience today, but you’re blinded by the vain philosophies of man and the rudiments of this world. Your refusal to believe in it doesn’t lessen the truth of this powerful experience. There is no denying it to the one who’s experienced it. Jeremiah said the Word was in him as a fire shut up in his bones. He couldn’t keep it contained and so he had to speak it out. That’s the effect of the Holy Ghost upon an individual. You can’t keep it contained but it bursts out like a river of living water, like an unquenchable fire and it’s loosed by the tongue. James 3 talks about the evil of the tongue and how it is like the rudder of a ship which controls the whole man. This is why God uses the tongue. Once someone has surrendered their life to Christ he fills them with the Holy Ghost and takes over their words, speaking through them. If you look at the children of Israel coming to Sinai to receive the law of God in Exodus 19, you will see where God came down in fire and smoke filled the whole mountain and caused it to quake. But from that smoke there came thundering and lightnings, and the translation of lightings is actually “languages.” God came down like a fire and there were languages which burst forth that the people heard. It was a precursor to Pentecost. The great difference of course is that he was writing his law upon stone then, whereas now he writes it “upon the fleshy tables of the heart” (2 Cor 3:3). Again, this is the fulfillment of what is prophesied in Jeremiah 31:33. In Galatians 4:6, Paul says that when we receive the Holy Ghost into our hearts we cry out “Abba, Father.” He uses two languages there (Hebrew and Greek) to show how when the Holy Ghost comes it creates cloven tongues. He mentions it again in Romans 8:15 and 16. It is honestly mind boggling that you call yourself a Christian and yet deny the very experience that makes one a Christian. You must be born again of water and the Spirit, Jesus said, or you cannot enter heaven. To miss something so easily seen in the Bible is truly the work of the enemy. I pray you study this out some more and receive the light of truth. It’s a very real and beautiful experience, and it still happens today because GOD DOES NOT CHANGE.

[@hermangroenewald8751]

@@alexanderh2345 Give us evidence that it is a heavenly language....

[@joshw6562]

@alexanderh2345 Acts 2:4-7 4: All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit, and they began to speak in other languages as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven residing in Jerusalem. 6 When this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was in confusion because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Completely baffled, they said, “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that each one of us hears them in our own native language? *IF* they were speaking in a heavenly language vs various human languages, it was such that everyone heard it in their own language, it is a Holy Spirit fueled speaking in tongues that has never been seen in a Pentecostal (et al) church. No other way of salvation? Ephesians 2:8-9 - For it is by Grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Acts 16:31 “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" Romans 10:9 "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved." Mark 1:15 "“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”" I don't seem to see a mention of tongues.

[@alexanderh2345]

@@hermangroenewald8751 Acts 2:4, Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6. Among MANY others. The human languages on the day of Pentecost were for the witness of all the Jews in the city. They even said “How hear we every man speaking in our own tongue (zero in on this part 👉) the wonderful works of God.“ This first giving of the Holy Spirit on the inward man was unique in that it was the first time, and God aligned it up in such a way that men from all over the world would be present to hear what was happening and inquire. There was also cloven tongues that sat upon each individual and a rushing mighty wind. But we do not see those two things ever accompany the infilling of the Holy Ghost throughout the rest of Scripture. BUT we of course see speaking in tongues several more times though it is never mentioned again that it is in a known human tongue. Paul, Peter, James, Luke, the writer of Hebrews and Jude ALL write about the Holy Ghost and tongues. This is the power from heaven Jesus spoke about and the prophets prophesied about. It’s not meant to be understood by the world because man’s wisdom is just foolishness to God. God has used the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. Think about that for a minute next time you listen to one of these PhD “theologians.”

[@TheCoaster78]

Thank you for this biblical and God honoring teaching!

[@ScottAniol]

Thanks for watching!

[@manorgospel579]

@@ScottAniol . The biggest issue with this theory is it's based on experience or the lack of "Because i don't experience it, it's not real or has ceased" here is no verse in the Bible that states silence indicates that God has ceased a specific action. This doctrine relies on logic rather than Scripture. While the logic may be compelling, the ultimate authority is not human reasoning but the Bible. Scripture remains infallible, even when it contradicts human logic or common sense. Cessationist teaching approaches heresy because it places final authority in human reason. I say "approaches" because the Bible does mention that certain gifts will cease, so the claim that they have or will cease is scripturally supported. The issue with cessationism is not the conclusion itself but the reasoning that leads to it. Examples of silence are not proof. I am deeply concerned that you are in danger of propagating what Paul referred to as "old wives' tales" in his letters to Timothy. When discussing cessationism, I do not perceive a biblical foundation; instead, I hear echoes of a conservative counterpart to the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). My background in a highly charismatic church that lacked robust biblical teaching makes me sensitive to these parallels. What I discern in your arguments is reminiscent of my charismatic experiences rather than a rigorous exegesis of Scripture. As a pastor, I must express a serious concern: cessationism may verge on heresy, even if it stops just short of it. The reason I refrain from labeling it outright heresy is that the Bible does indicate that spiritual gifts will cease at some point. My issue with cessationism lies not in its conclusion that certain gifts have ceased, but in the methodology used to reach this conclusion. It is the exegesis, or lack thereof, that alarms me. The process by which cessationism is argued often appears deeply flawed, bringing it perilously close to heretical territory. The core issue is the reliance on silence as a foundation for doctrinal positions. Cessationist arguments frequently hinge on the absence of evidence, interpreting this silence as a basis for doctrine. This approach is fraught with danger, as it involves constructing theological assertions based on what is not explicitly stated in Scripture. For example, cessationists often argue that the declining mention of certain spiritual gifts after 1 Corinthians indicates their cessation. They might question why faith healers are not routinely summoned to hospitals today, concluding from this absence that such gifts no longer exist. Using silence to interpret the Bible is a precarious method. Consider the Pool of Bethesda, where Jesus healed only one of many sick individuals. Does this imply that God does not heal physically? Or take Acts 3, where a man lame from birth is healed by Peter and John, despite possibly having been passed by Jesus numerous times. Does Jesus’ failure to heal this man earlier negate His healing powers? Clearly, such conclusions are unwarranted. The absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence. This principle is vital when interpreting Scripture. The book of Esther, for instance, never mentions God explicitly, yet His providential hand is evident throughout. To claim God's inactivity based on His silence in Esther would be erroneous. There are several critical problems with using silence as a basis for doctrinal conclusions: Multiple Variables: Silence can stem from numerous factors. For cessationism to be valid, all other possible explanations for the biblical silence must be excluded, which cessationists have not convincingly achieved. Theological laziness often underpins the acceptance of such arguments. Consider the following possibilities: Cessationism might be correct. Accounts of spiritual gifts might exist but be lost to history, as suggested by John's statement that Jesus' actions were too numerous to record exhaustively. The early church might have considered spiritual gifts normal, hence not noteworthy for further documentation. Divisions over gifts could have led to a deliberate silence to avoid conflict. Timothy's caution about neglecting spiritual gifts indicates that their use could wane for reasons other than cessation. Each of these possibilities, and others, must be disproven to establish cessationism conclusively, which is practically impossible. Using silence as proof is thus a deeply flawed exegetical method. Elevation of Personal Experience: Arguments from silence often elevate personal experience over biblical testimony. The reasoning typically follows: "I have not seen or experienced it; therefore, it does not exist." This is akin to the foundation of charismatic theology, which asserts the reality of experiences as proof. Both approaches are problematic because they rely on subjective experience rather than objective scriptural evidence. Many individuals in my congregation struggle with doubts about God's existence or activity due to perceived silence, which arguments from silence can exacerbate. In conclusion, my contention is not with the assertion that spiritual gifts have ceased, but with the use of biblical silence as the primary support for this claim. By endorsing silence as a valid interpretative tool, you inadvertently promote its use in broader theological contexts, leading to flawed conclusions such as, "If Jesus didn't explicitly address it, it must be wrong or right." This misguided methodology forces pastors to address and correct erroneous beliefs, thereby undermining sound doctrinal teaching.

[@manorgospel579]

Biblical References Cited: Esther 4:14 John 21:25 2 Timothy 3:16 Proverbs 3:5-6 1 Timothy 4:7 2 Timothy 4:3-4 John 5:1-9 (Pool of Bethesda) Acts 3:1-10 (Healing of the lame man) 1 Timothy 4:14 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 2 Corinthians 5:7 1 John 4:1

[@manorgospel579]

The biggest issue with this theory is it's based on experience or the lack of "Because i don't experience it, it's not real or has ceased" here is no verse in the Bible that states silence indicates that God has ceased a specific action. This doctrine relies on logic rather than Scripture. While the logic may be compelling, the ultimate authority is not human reasoning but the Bible. Scripture remains infallible, even when it contradicts human logic or common sense. Cessationist teaching approaches heresy because it places final authority in human reason. I say "approaches" because the Bible does mention that certain gifts will cease, so the claim that they have or will cease is scripturally supported. The issue with cessationism is not the conclusion itself but the reasoning that leads to it. Examples of silence are not proof. I am deeply concerned that you are in danger of propagating what Paul referred to as "old wives' tales" in his letters to Timothy. When discussing cessationism, I do not perceive a biblical foundation; instead, I hear echoes of a conservative counterpart to the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). My background in a highly charismatic church that lacked robust biblical teaching makes me sensitive to these parallels. What I discern in your arguments is reminiscent of my charismatic experiences rather than a rigorous exegesis of Scripture. As a pastor, I must express a serious concern: cessationism may verge on heresy, even if it stops just short of it. The reason I refrain from labeling it outright heresy is that the Bible does indicate that spiritual gifts will cease at some point. My issue with cessationism lies not in its conclusion that certain gifts have ceased, but in the methodology used to reach this conclusion. It is the exegesis, or lack thereof, that alarms me. The process by which cessationism is argued often appears deeply flawed, bringing it perilously close to heretical territory. The core issue is the reliance on silence as a foundation for doctrinal positions. Cessationist arguments frequently hinge on the absence of evidence, interpreting this silence as a basis for doctrine. This approach is fraught with danger, as it involves constructing theological assertions based on what is not explicitly stated in Scripture. For example, cessationists often argue that the declining mention of certain spiritual gifts after 1 Corinthians indicates their cessation. They might question why faith healers are not routinely summoned to hospitals today, concluding from this absence that such gifts no longer exist. Using silence to interpret the Bible is a precarious method. Consider the Pool of Bethesda, where Jesus healed only one of many sick individuals. Does this imply that God does not heal physically? Or take Acts 3, where a man lame from birth is healed by Peter and John, despite possibly having been passed by Jesus numerous times. Does Jesus’ failure to heal this man earlier negate His healing powers? Clearly, such conclusions are unwarranted. The absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence. This principle is vital when interpreting Scripture. The book of Esther, for instance, never mentions God explicitly, yet His providential hand is evident throughout. To claim God's inactivity based on His silence in Esther would be erroneous. There are several critical problems with using silence as a basis for doctrinal conclusions: Multiple Variables: Silence can stem from numerous factors. For cessationism to be valid, all other possible explanations for the biblical silence must be excluded, which cessationists have not convincingly achieved. Theological laziness often underpins the acceptance of such arguments. Consider the following possibilities: Cessationism might be correct. Accounts of spiritual gifts might exist but be lost to history, as suggested by John's statement that Jesus' actions were too numerous to record exhaustively. The early church might have considered spiritual gifts normal, hence not noteworthy for further documentation. Divisions over gifts could have led to a deliberate silence to avoid conflict. Timothy's caution about neglecting spiritual gifts indicates that their use could wane for reasons other than cessation. Each of these possibilities, and others, must be disproven to establish cessationism conclusively, which is practically impossible. Using silence as proof is thus a deeply flawed exegetical method. Elevation of Personal Experience: Arguments from silence often elevate personal experience over biblical testimony. The reasoning typically follows: "I have not seen or experienced it; therefore, it does not exist." This is akin to the foundation of charismatic theology, which asserts the reality of experiences as proof. Both approaches are problematic because they rely on subjective experience rather than objective scriptural evidence. Many individuals in my congregation struggle with doubts about God's existence or activity due to perceived silence, which arguments from silence can exacerbate. In conclusion, my contention is not with the assertion that spiritual gifts have ceased, but with the use of biblical silence as the primary support for this claim. By endorsing silence as a valid interpretative tool, you inadvertently promote its use in broader theological contexts, leading to flawed conclusions such as, "If Jesus didn't explicitly address it, it must be wrong or right." This misguided methodology forces pastors to address and correct erroneous beliefs, thereby undermining sound doctrinal teaching. Right now I Have to deal with people that say Gay marriage is Scriptural because it's not mentioned by Jesus specifically.....