PDA

View Full Version : Should everyone pray in tongues?



kdub
Jun 29th 2008, 07:45 PM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.

Kahtar
Jun 29th 2008, 07:55 PM
Many times way too much emphasis is placed upon tongues, or some other gift. Some go so far as to say that unless you speak in tongues, you are not saved. This is foolishness.
The evidence of the Spirit in our lives are the fruits of the Spirit, not the gifts of the Spirit.
I think many do receive the ability to speak, or pray, in tongues. I think also, however, that the 'gift' of tongues is limited to a few. There is a difference in having a gift and operating in that ability.
For instance, my primary gift is teacher, but I have operated in healing, evangelism, discernment, prophecy, etc., as the situation warrented.I do speak in tongues, but never publicly. It is merely a 'prayer language' to me, rather than a gift that I operate in.
All the gifts have as their central purpose the witnessing and testimony of God's power and love. None of them are for our personal benefit, none of them elevate us to any spiritual 'position'. In other words, a person who has the gift of healing is no more holy than a person who only speaks in tongues, or does not currently operate in a gift.
I have seen so many 'parade' their gift around, displaying it for all to see and marvel at their level of 'holiness'. What a bunch of hogwash! Spiritual pride!
(sticks finger in throat and gags)

davidandme
Jun 29th 2008, 07:55 PM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.
God and people around you want you to pray in a language that they can all understand. The reason for this gift of the spirit is to spread the gospel to people who do not speak your language.

SweetSomber
Jun 29th 2008, 09:07 PM
I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.

You can be baptized in the Holy Spirit, be a christian, and have the Holy Spirit dwell within you without having the gift of praying in tongues. God definitely does not have all christians pray in tongues. I know hundreds upon hundreds of true christians, many who are very dedicated and close to God, who have never spoken nor prayed in tongues. I think it's kinda interesting that it's only in pentacostal churches that most people speak or pray in tongues.

Don't give in to peer pressure and fake it! Find your peace in God, not in the doctrines of others. You're not doing wrong by not speaking in tongues - if God wants you to speak in tongues, HE will tell you so, and HE will give you the ability to do so. I remember this one book that I read, it asked "How can we follow the shepherd if we're getting pushed around by the sheep?" Follow God's leading in your life, not the pressure of others.

I've been a christian for almost nine years; I've never prayed in tongues, and God's never told me that I should be praying in tongues, and He's never given me the inclination or ability.

God Bless :)

Sold Out
Jun 29th 2008, 10:17 PM
Many times way too much emphasis is placed upon tongues, or some other gift. Some go so far as to say that unless you speak in tongues, you are not saved. This is foolishness.
The evidence of the Spirit in our lives are the fruits of the Spirit, not the gifts of the Spirit.
I think many do receive the ability to speak, or pray, in tongues. I think also, however, that the 'gift' of tongues is limited to a few. There is a difference in having a gift and operating in that ability.
For instance, my primary gift is teacher, but I have operated in healing, evangelism, discernment, prophecy, etc., as the situation warrented.I do speak in tongues, but never publicly. It is merely a 'prayer language' to me, rather than a gift that I operate in.
All the gifts have as their central purpose the witnessing and testimony of God's power and love. None of them are for our personal benefit, none of them elevate us to any spiritual 'position'. In other words, a person who has the gift of healing is no more holy than a person who only speaks in tongues, or does not currently operate in a gift.
I have seen so many 'parade' their gift around, displaying it for all to see and marvel at their level of 'holiness'. What a bunch of hogwash! Spiritual pride!
(sticks finger in throat and gags)

Great post. No one should 'pressure' you into it.

Oma
Jun 29th 2008, 10:55 PM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.


What does the pastor say is the purpose of speaking/praying in tongues for you? The believer has all he needs in Christ for salvation, nothing can be added to it.

If today's speaking in tongues is for real, then it needs to be a real existing language such as people understand and would only be of use on the mission field.

The purposeful gift of tongues at Pentacost was to spread the Gospel to all people in the then known world and the apostles didn't need to spend time learing them first. That is proved in:
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Act 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia....

That gift is no longer needed as we have the complete Bible translated in most languages and that gift of tongues has ceased.


1Co 14:22

Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not....



1Co 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?




1Co 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease....


The following link may be of help to you.
http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?currSection=sermonstopic&keyworddesc=Tongues%2C+Speaking&keyword=tongue

davidandme
Jun 30th 2008, 12:42 AM
Many times way too much emphasis is placed upon tongues, or some other gift. Some go so far as to say that unless you speak in tongues, you are not saved. This is foolishness.
The evidence of the Spirit in our lives are the fruits of the Spirit, not the gifts of the Spirit.
I think many do receive the ability to speak, or pray, in tongues. I think also, however, that the 'gift' of tongues is limited to a few. There is a difference in having a gift and operating in that ability.
For instance, my primary gift is teacher, but I have operated in healing, evangelism, discernment, prophecy, etc., as the situation warrented.I do speak in tongues, but never publicly. It is merely a 'prayer language' to me, rather than a gift that I operate in.
All the gifts have as their central purpose the witnessing and testimony of God's power and love. None of them are for our personal benefit, none of them elevate us to any spiritual 'position'. In other words, a person who has the gift of healing is no more holy than a person who only speaks in tongues, or does not currently operate in a gift.
I have seen so many 'parade' their gift around, displaying it for all to see and marvel at their level of 'holiness'. What a bunch of hogwash! Spiritual pride!
(sticks finger in throat and gags)
This is very true.

cross crusader
Jun 30th 2008, 01:35 AM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.
if you have been baptized by the Holy spirit, you are able to speak in tongues, (the prayer language used for edification of yourself between you and God.) i was baptized by the Holy spirit and didnt speak in tongues for about 3 to 4 months, only because i didnt know any better. so yes you can be baptized by the spirit and not speak in tongues. any and everyone can pray in tongues who have been baptized by the holy spirirt. you just have to accept it by faith, just like speaking words of wisdom and knowledge or healing. you have to accept what God wants you to do or is trying to do through you.
But the Gift of tongues i believe is something totally different that is spoken in a service that should always be followed by an interpretation.

LetsDrinkCoke
Jun 30th 2008, 02:51 AM
if you have been baptized by the Holy spirit, you are able to speak in tongues, (the prayer language used for edification of yourself between you and God.) i was baptized by the Holy spirit and didnt speak in tongues for about 3 to 4 months, only because i didnt know any better. so yes you can be baptized by the spirit and not speak in tongues. any and everyone can pray in tongues who have been baptized by the holy spirirt. you just have to accept it by faith, just like speaking words of wisdom and knowledge or healing. you have to accept what God wants you to do or is trying to do through you.
But the Gift of tongues i believe is something totally different that is spoken in a service that should always be followed by an interpretation.

I am not sure you can say everyone who is baptized by the Holy Spirit can speak in tongues.

To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines. (1Cor 12:7-11).

Not everyone is given this ability, only some. Being Baptisted in the Holy Spirit does not mean you can speak in tongues, nor does speaking in tongues mean you are baptised in the holy spirit. As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the only way to show that you are baptised in the Holy Spirit is by the fruits of your works.

Naphal
Jun 30th 2008, 06:35 AM
And I definitely won't fake it.



Good for you. IMO 99.9 percent of "tongues" is faked whether knowingly or not.

valleybldr
Jun 30th 2008, 12:01 PM
Good for you. IMO 99.9 percent of "tongues" is faked whether knowingly or not. So, I take it you have seen a case where you thought it was genuine? todd

downpouredlife
Jun 30th 2008, 01:43 PM
Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

My best friend grew up in a charismatic church, received the Holy Spirit when she was very very young, but didn't receive the gift of tongues until she was 19. She was prayed for many times, but it wasn't God's timing. So keep asking, but don't feel pressured by the church or your pastor. It isn't up to you anyway. Paul says some cool things about it all. Consider this:

The purpose of tongues is largely (not completely) to edify the individual, and not the church body.
http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_Footnotes_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_Footnotes_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gif


I Corinthians 14: 2-4 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.

So Church, according to Paul, is not the best place to speak in tongues anyway. Paul, who says he spoke in tongues MORE THAN ANY of the Corinthians, also said this:


1 Cor 14:18-19 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

So yes, eagerly desire all the gifts of the Spirit, but seek to excel in the ones that build up the body. (1 Corinthians 14:12) Maybe God isn't focused on that gift in you right now - perhaps he wants you to learn serve the body through another gift, even though it looks different than what everyone else is doing. Or, maybe you'll receive it next week!

downpouredlife
Jun 30th 2008, 01:53 PM
Good for you. IMO 99.9 percent of "tongues" is faked whether knowingly or not.

I get what you're trying to point out, but consider this:
My toddler is learning to speak. She babbles 99.9999999 percent of the time, and throws in a "real" word every now and then. But her babbling is my delight, because I know what she's seeking to do.

Paul says that tongues is a language, just like any other language. So while the Spirit gives us the ABILITY to speak, (just as a newborn has the latent ability to speak at birth), this implies that we may have to earn how to speak it correctly, even after the initial outpouring of the Spirit on our lives.

I think that many times, those who are 'babies' in the gift 'babble'. That's ok. They're learning, and it delights the Father's heart. We need to have grace for the learning curve in this gift the same that we would for any other gift - Teaching, prophecy, service, etc.

(And yes, I'm sure that sometimes an individual completely fakes tongues b/c of pressure. Grace to them! It's hard to feel pressured!)

Friend of I AM
Jun 30th 2008, 01:55 PM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.

Hey Kdub,

Praying in tongues is a gift, but it does state in scripture that tongues although a gift of God, are not that edifying unless one is able to use the gift to bring others to the faith. This can be applied to any gift given by God. I would try to pray to God to help you use what gifts he's given you, to edify the body, and bring others into the faith. You may want to even discuss with your preacher what gifts you think you have, and how you can use them to help your congregation. Hope this information helps you.

Stephen

downpouredlife
Jun 30th 2008, 05:50 PM
.

Do you have a biblical basis to back that up? I don't think we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. People mishandle what is holy, and of God, but the Source is pure, and the gift is still good!

VerticalReality
Jun 30th 2008, 06:01 PM
.

Yet, when folks "come down so hard" like you have above, I often find they are taking just as extreme of a position that hinders the body of Christ as those who abuse the gifts. It's just at the opposite end of the spectrum.

kdub
Jun 30th 2008, 07:22 PM
Thank you all very much. I feel like I have a better understanding and will keep searching the Word and praying about this. It is possible I may never receive the gift of tongues, and this is fine with me. I will glorify God in other ways I am good at. I think that is why God made us all such different individuals, we all have different strengths and weaknesses to share.

threebigrocks
Jun 30th 2008, 08:04 PM
Thank you all very much. I feel like I have a better understanding and will keep searching the Word and praying about this. It is possible I may never receive the gift of tongues, and this is fine with me. I will glorify God in other ways I am good at. I think that is why God made us all such different individuals, we all have different strengths and weaknesses to share.

God will bless those who follow him. He will equip you with gifts to use when you do so, as with everyone else, as He deems necessary. He can bestow a gift as God desires. All we need to be is willing to be used by Him and not by our own preconceived notions.

timmyb
Jun 30th 2008, 08:07 PM
keep in mind that there are different kinds of tongues..

praying in the spirit/tongues

prophesying which needs an interpreter

literally speaking in another language which is a sign to the unbeliever

threebigrocks
Jun 30th 2008, 08:12 PM
keep in mind that there are different kinds of tongues..

praying in the spirit/tongues

prophesying which needs an interpreter

literally speaking in another language which is a sign to the unbeliever

Phrophesying is not speaking in tongues my friend. They are seperate and distinct gifts, as listed in scripture.

Speaking in another language/tongues is the same thing. What sets it apart as a true gift is knowing it's of the Spirit with each word.

keck553
Jun 30th 2008, 08:52 PM
Do you have a biblical basis to back that up? I don't think we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. People mishandle what is holy, and of God, but the Source is pure, and the gift is still good!

Sorry, I can't find the post that you are asking me about. All I have ever observed regarding people roaming around a room and babbling is confusion, fear and the absence any Word of God, and abuse. I have never seen God exaulted, Messiah lifted up, or Him edifyed by such actions.

Maybe I'm just affected by religion? I don't mean to step on anyone's toes, but when people come worrying about their salvation because they can't meaningfully mumble unintelligibly, I get huge red flags popping up around me.

I've actually have met people who think they are rejected by God because of this issue.

kdub
Jun 30th 2008, 09:14 PM
Is there any scripture that states everyone can speak in tongues? Or the opposite, scripture stating that "not" everyone can receive that gift?

kdub
Jun 30th 2008, 09:22 PM
Sorry, I can't find the post that you are asking me about. All I have ever observed regarding people roaming around a room and babbling is confusion, fear and the absence any Word of God, and abuse. I have never seen God exaulted, Messiah lifted up, or Him edifyed by such actions.

Maybe I'm just affected by religion? I don't mean to step on anyone's toes, but when people come worrying about their salvation because they can't meaningfully mumble unintelligibly, I get huge red flags popping up around me.

I've actually have met people who think they are rejected by God because of this issue.

That type of teaching is more the work of satan than of God.


See, I feel a little bit the same way. I think some people might be pressured into possibly faking this gift, especially in the Pentacostal churches where it is emphasized. I really enjoy the upbeat praise and worship, but I felt out of place and pressured a little bit which I don't think helps in your relationship with God. It was kind of a turn off for me that "everybody needs to speak in tongues." It made me feel my salvation was being questioned I guess. I am going to speak with the pastor about it. We have actually became pretty good friends.

I don't know for sure. I am still praying about it, reading, and listening to other believers on the topic.

keck553
Jun 30th 2008, 09:46 PM
We have our Rock and the assurance. Whatever we learn or unlearn, we have that foundation. Love the Lord with all your heart, mind and strength, and love each other as ourself is what all these teachings should rest on.

All these other things I or anyone else can be in error. Our personal experiences, circumstances and correct teachings and false teachings all influence us, and it's our struggle to put see Christ crucified in each other despite these sometimes emotioally charged issues.

I've done it myself in this forum. For that I am sorry.

Study the Word, pray a lot and delight in the Lord, for the Creator who made you and stands far above you wants to fellowship with you!!!.

tango
Jun 30th 2008, 09:55 PM
There is nothing wrong with not speaking in tongues, the Bible explicitly states that not everybody receives every gift:

1Co 12:4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Co 12:5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord.
1Co 12:6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all.
1Co 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all:
1Co 12:8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit,
1Co 12:9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit,
1Co 12:10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.
1Co 12:11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.


Paul's (presumably rhetorical) questions in this section, later on in the same chapter, reinforce the idea that not everybody does the same thing, and he also lists tongues as a minor gift.

1Co 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.
1Co 12:28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues.
1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?



My own experience of tongues is that I sometimes pray to God in tongues, in private. Only once have I ever prayed with someone and prayed in tongues.

I have heard people speaking in tongues openly in church, and when this happens the correct procedure is to wait for an interpretation - this is also described by Paul (1Co 14:27-28). In fact the whole of 1Co 14 is worth reading, it will probably put quite a lot in perspective for you.

keck553
Jun 30th 2008, 10:23 PM
Nowhere in thiose scriptures are described unintelligible gibberish. I see different languages being spoken and interpreted.....as I would expect in such a nexus of conquered countries and trade route..... when I was in the military, I was taught to interpret Russian. Russian to my ear was orderly with grammatical context and followed and organized structure of human communication. To others it still sounded like human language, they just couldn't interpret it.

Please show me exactly where it says people mumble in unintelligible gruntings and such are exercising some gift from God. The ability to learn and speak many languages certainly IS a gift not all people posses. I can't see where the scripture supports such an assertion. Thanks.

tango
Jun 30th 2008, 10:27 PM
1Co 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.

Do you know what tongues of angels sound like? I find a lot of languages I don't understand sound like unintelligible gibberish. I live and work with a lot of Asians and Orientals and when they talk with each other in their own languages it sounds like gibberish to me.

keck553
Jun 30th 2008, 11:00 PM
Obviously Paul is posturing an hypthoical if - then. I wouldn't base an entire ministry on 'if'.

Look up the Greek term. You will find it most ofter referres either to the physical organ or language, that is the product of the tongue. If you'll please study out the Lexicon
γλωσσαι you'll find it refers to something different than the ecstatic utterances of the pagan cults of the day. The terminology would favor a speaking in foreign languages.

In chapter 13, Paul teaches agape love as the motivating factor in the realm of spiritual gifts. Tongues are singled out as perhaps most indicative of the spritual gifts expressed in Corinth. Some have seen in this opening verse as a case for tongues as ecstatic utterances, based upon the phrase "tongues of angels". The reasoning follows that the participant, when seized by the "spirit" speaks to a heavenly language which Paul here calls "tongues of angels" in contrast to "tongues of men." This position is tenuous at best for the following reasons:

First, Paul is listing unreal situations. The class of the conditional sentanc is not decisive, but the context is. It is obviously an unreal condition, since Paul is not boasting to have "known all mysteries and all kowledge" nor to have had "all faith" nor to have "given all is possessions to the poor." He likewise had not undergone martydom at the burning stake. All these are hypothetical in the flow of his polemic and not something expereinced by him. It us therefor hypothetical, not actual, when Paul writes "If I speak....."

Secondly, even allowing for the existance of an angelic language from this verse, there is no evidence that such a language is something of an entirely different nature than languages in general. Every instance of communication by angelic beings reported in Scripture is intelligible as normal language.

Furthermore, Jewish tradition hold that the heavenly language is Hebrew, and Paul was a Jew. That the angels speak this heavenly language is evidenced by the fact that they administered the giving of the Torah, which was in Hebrew.

I state this with respect and love. Peace be with you.

tango
Jun 30th 2008, 11:12 PM
I agree entirely with the requirement to have love when exercising any one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and that tongues have the potential to be so divisive.

However, when speaking in another language it is likely to sound like gibberish to someone who is not familiar with that language. When I hear people speaking in Hindi it sounds, to me, like a barrage of noise with no form. It therefore follows that were someone to speak Hindi as a manifestation of the Spirit that it would sound like gibberish to me. The very fact that the gift of interpretation (as opposed to translation) exists suggests to me that the gift of tongues is sometimes intended for public use.

Looking at angelic languages I agree that every time an angel interacted with a human it spoke in a language the human could understand - the interaction would be less than successful if we couldn't understand what the angels were telling us. But that doesn't mean that angels speak human languages to each other - just like my Indian colleagues speak in English when they talk to me but in Hindi when they talk amongst themselves it seems reasonable to at least consider the possibility that angels speak our language when they come to us but have their own language they use in heaven.

Just out of curiosity, what would you expect the gift of tongues (assuming it were used in accordance with God's wishes rather than made up to satisfy men) to sound like?

immortality
Jun 30th 2008, 11:32 PM
my sister said the other day that a friend she works with, who is apparently quite religious, prayed to god for the first time in tongues. i was skeptical and to be honest, found it amusing.

god knows what we need before we even ask him. why then would it be necessary to pray in a different language?

besides, when i earnestly pray to god, the holy spirit intercedes with groans that words cannot express.

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 12:13 AM
my sister said the other day that a friend she works with, who is apparently quite religious, prayed to god for the first time in tongues. i was skeptical and to be honest, found it amusing.

god knows what we need before we even ask him. why then would it be necessary to pray in a different language?



It's a very old misunderstanding about what the bible says about tongues and what tongues actually is. The confusion comes from not being able to discern between the Holy tongues from God which never needs to be interpreted and human tongues which is simply any of the various languages mankind speaks. The third is the attempt to produce what someone thinks is the Holy tongues which is just a made up gibberish that is supposed to sound "other worldly". Most people actually believe that's the Holy tongues of the bible but it is just based on ignorance.

godsgirl
Jul 1st 2008, 01:10 AM
In the Bible-when one was baptised in the Spirit they spoke in tongues as the Spirit enabled them....
Acts 2:4, Acts 19:6, Acts 10:46
The confusion comes because there are different uses or purposes for tongues here are some scriptures that explain the differences.

Public Gift of Tongues

Spoken with interpretation to the church (Equal to prophecy-1 Corinthians 14:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A5))
To be interpreted (1 Corinthians 14:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A5))
Edifies the church (when interpreted-1 Corinthians 14:4-5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A4-5))
A sign to unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A22))
Not given to all believers (1 Corinthians 12:30 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+12%3A30)))


Personal Prayer Tongue
Spoken privately to God (1 Corinthians 14:2 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A2))
No interpretation necessary (1 Corinthians 14:28 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A28))
Edifies the individual believer (1 Corinthians 14:4 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A4))
Can be manifested when no unbelievers are present (Acts 10:46 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Acts+10%3A46); 19:6)
Should be desired and practiced by all Christians Mark 16:17 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mark+16%3A17); 1 Corinthians 14:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1+Corinthians+14%3A5); Ephesians 6:18 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Ephesians+6%3A18); Jude 20 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Jude+20) ).


Your pastor was merely telling you to do what Paul told us to do.

godsgirl
Jul 1st 2008, 01:45 AM
I have been going to an Assembly Of God church recently and like it so far. In the past month or so, our pastor has been kind of pressuring everyone to pray in tongues. He has said that everyone should pray in tongues. I have not been blessed with this gift, and when he has asked everyone to pray in tongues, I of course do not. It is a small town and church and I feel very pressured into doing this. The pastor is very big on the power of the Pentacost. I do believe it is a gift from the Holy Spirit and can be very beneficial, and I am having a hard time feeling forced into this.

I know I have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me- giving me grace, faith, and strength. I have prayed for this gift but have yet to receive it. I know God will give you what you need when you need it, but does everyone get the gift of tongues? Can you be baptized in the Holy Spirit and not have the outward effect of speaking this heavenly language? I am feeling like I am doing something wrong by not speaking in tongues, but I don't think I should feel this way. And I definitely won't fake it.

Please help me understand better.

Yes, the Holy Spirit dwells in you, yes you are saved-but your pastor is merely letting you know that Jesus wants to baptise you in the Holy Spirit--and when He does you will be able to speak in tongues as the Spirit enables you. Jesus wants all of us to receive this baptism, in fact, He said it was a promise from our Father--I don't know why it is harder for some of us than others-for me it was hard too...

I had "heard" of this-(the Baptism in the Holy Spirit), but I didn't attend a church that taught it-and I just wasn't sure what was right and what wasnt'. For awhile, I believed it was something real and for me, then I'd hear another preacher and go the opposite way-( much like reading answers to your posts-some said yes, some said no) first I was believing, then not believing it-finally, I began to seek the Lord Jesus Christ on this matter-and asked Him to teach me if it was right or wrong. Over a period of about 4 months He taught me through the scriptures that He wanted all of His children to receive-so I asked Jesus to baptise me in the Holy Spirit-but for quite a while-nothing happened-no bolts of lightning, nobody moved my mouth for me, and I just couldn't quite "get it". Then one night I had a dream and woke up praying in a language I didn't know. But :B dense as I am-I still wasn't convinced. (I thought it was just a dream) A couple weeks later-I was praying alone in my dining room and asked Him "once again" to baptise me. I had a short "vision" for lack of a better term-of Jesus walking toward me-I was so humbled I couldn't look up at Him-but could clearly see His sandaled feet and the Hem of His garment-He had His Hand outstretched-and when He laid His Hands on my head-I fell to the floor on my knees-praying in a language I didn't know-the room drifted into the background and there was only Him. He is Love-manifested.
He changed me from someone who was "religious" to someone who absolutly fell in love with the King of Kings. Totally different relationship.




"there is coming one who is mightier than I, it is He who baptises with the Holy Spirit"

As far as the "gift" of tongues-where one speaks in a church service-and the interpretation comes forth.===about a year or so after that-the Lord used me in that gift. I maybe have been used in that gift 6 or 7 times in my life-but tongues, as prayer and praise-much more often.


Jesus called this "baptism in the Spirit" the promise of the Father in Acts 1-Peter told us who the promise was for in Acts 2...
--for the promise is to you and to your children and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call. (Acts 2:38-39)

Blessings to you, dear kdub, Jesus will baptise you in the Spirit when you are ready to receive-and when He does you will fall so in love with Him that your praise in english will be totally inadequate..in fact, many people are baptised in the Spirit and begin to speak in tongues as they are praising the Lord with their voice.

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 04:18 PM
I agree entirely with the requirement to have love when exercising any one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and that tongues have the potential to be so divisive.

However, when speaking in another language it is likely to sound like gibberish to someone who is not familiar with that language. When I hear people speaking in Hindi it sounds, to me, like a barrage of noise with no form. It therefore follows that were someone to speak Hindi as a manifestation of the Spirit that it would sound like gibberish to me. The very fact that the gift of interpretation (as opposed to translation) exists suggests to me that the gift of tongues is sometimes intended for public use.

Looking at angelic languages I agree that every time an angel interacted with a human it spoke in a language the human could understand - the interaction would be less than successful if we couldn't understand what the angels were telling us. But that doesn't mean that angels speak human languages to each other - just like my Indian colleagues speak in English when they talk to me but in Hindi when they talk amongst themselves it seems reasonable to at least consider the possibility that angels speak our language when they come to us but have their own language they use in heaven.

Just out of curiosity, what would you expect the gift of tongues (assuming it were used in accordance with God's wishes rather than made up to satisfy men) to sound like?

As a trained linguist I can discern ordered human communication from disordered grunts and utterances. There is no Scriptual evidence that God created angels to communicate in such a way, in fact Scripture reveals the contrary. In fact incomprehensible utterances and grunts are of pagan origin.

Now think about it. And be honest with yourself. If you are communicating something in incomprehensible utterance, how do you know you're reciting something from the Holy Spirit? Can not unclean language come from us? I know that I'm not perfect, even on this board, and certainly I have not always exalted HaShem in my speech and my posts. So if we slip and profane the name of God in our known tongue, how do we really know what we are uttering? My opinion is nothing at all, or no idea what is being said, and anyone who has done this knows it. Interpreter? On what basis would I trust an interpreter of babble?

I tell you, in the congregation that instructed me to 'pretend' I was filled with the Holy Spirit on stage, they had the pastor's mother come and prophecy to women on Mother's Day. It was not until my eyes were opened that I realized it was all a set up. The ladies in the congregation that had been there a while got specific and detailed prophecy and the ones who were new got vague, horoscope-like prophecies. The pastor wielded the individual prophecy's to control his congregational members. He would say to them individually that if they did anything outside of his will (He claimed to be closer to God in heirarchy) their prophecys would be stripped from them and they would enter a period of weeping and gnashing of teeth. Now some of the leadership babbled (spoke in Tongues I guess) and this was also used for control.

What ever this congregation represented, God's mercy and grace allowed me study the Word and to grow up into a much more fruitful relationship in Him.

We submit to God, not other men. When Jesus blasted the Pharisees, He told the truth that we have only One Rabbi, One Teacher, One Father. All I have ever seen out of people babbling is other people being exhalted and/or noticed. I have never, ever seen it edify God, not have I ever seen it 'work' with an unbeleiver.

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 04:23 PM
Jesus called this "baptism in the Spirit" the promise of the Father in Acts 1-Peter told us who the promise was for in Acts 2...
--for the promise is to you and to your children and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call. (Acts 2:38-39)



Please show me in Scripture where Jesus, Kefa or Sha'ul calls unintellgible babble 'baptism in the Spirit".

Thank you.

VerticalReality
Jul 1st 2008, 05:21 PM
Now think about it. And be honest with yourself. If you are communicating something in incomprehensible utterance, how do you know you're reciting something from the Holy Spirit? Can not unclean language come from us? I know that I'm not perfect, even on this board, and certainly I have not always exalted HaShem in my speech and my posts. So if we slip and profane the name of God in our known tongue, how do we really know what we are uttering? My opinion is nothing at all, or no idea what is being said, and anyone who has done this knows it. Interpreter? On what basis would I trust an interpreter of babble?

Okay, now you are being just downright inconsistent. First you state that these folks are just "babbling" or speaking "gibberish", and now in the post above you make it sound as if they aren't just "babbling" or speaking "gibberish". You now try to insinuate they are speaking some sort of unintelligible language that is of pagan or maybe even demonic origin. Is it "babbling" and "gibberish" or not? If you are so willing to accept that these practices might be of some spiritual source other than the Lord, why is it so difficult for you to accept that the Lord may, in fact, speak an unintelligible language through His children as well? It just seems to me here that you are having difficulty with this because you cannot wrap your natural mind around it.

Whispering Grace
Jul 1st 2008, 05:38 PM
I have seen so many 'parade' their gift around, displaying it for all to see and marvel at their level of 'holiness'. What a bunch of hogwash! Spiritual pride!
(sticks finger in throat and gags)

A hearty "AMEN" to this!

I've had an older woman in church ask me countless times if I've been baptized in the Holy Ghost, simply because she's never heard me speak in tongues (I guess she keeps forgetting she's already asked?). Truth is, I have zero need to prove my "spirituality" to anyone, and I am hardly impressed with those who must show the church how "gifted" they are every time we have church.

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 09:42 PM
Okay, now you are being just downright inconsistent. First you state that these folks are just "babbling" or speaking "gibberish", and now in the post above you make it sound as if they aren't just "babbling" or speaking "gibberish". You now try to insinuate they are speaking some sort of unintelligible language that is of pagan or maybe even demonic origin. Is it "babbling" and "gibberish" or not? If you are so willing to accept that these practices might be of some spiritual source other than the Lord, why is it so difficult for you to accept that the Lord may, in fact, speak an unintelligible language through His children as well? It just seems to me here that you are having difficulty with this because you cannot wrap your natural mind around it.

I'm not inconsistant at all. First, Like Paul in 1 Cor 13, I was speaking to the hypothetical. You DO know Paul was speaking hypothetically in that verse? Secondly, Paul was a Jew, a Torah Teacher and a learned Pharisee. The only reference he would have to 'angel talk' are the references in the TeNaKh where they spoke plainly and clearly in Hebrew. The only documentation about Paul hearing from the Spirit world cite clear, consise human language, I would assume Aramaic.

Secondly, God is a God of order and that is revealed to us not only by the creation, but by His Word in the Scriptures.

I'm just simply saying that when saying these utterences, you haven't a clue what the content is. I would default to that it means nothing at all, but the confusion and fear that it puts in people in the context that they may not have God's promise (Holy Spirit) is downright unscriptual and wrong.

satan loves disorder, confusion, fear and separtion from God.

You do the math.

tango
Jul 1st 2008, 09:50 PM
I'm not inconsistant at all. First, Like Paul in 1 Cor 13, I was speaking to the hypothetical. You DO know Paul was speaking hypothetically in that verse? Yes? Secondly, Paul was a Jew, a Torah Teacher and a learned Pharisee. The only reference he would have to 'angel talk' are the references in the TeNaKh where they spoke plainly and clearly in Hebrew.

Secondly, God is a God of order and that is revealed to us not only by the creation, but by His Word in the Scriptures.

I'm just simply saying that when saying these utterences, you haven't a clue what the content is. I would default to that it means nothing at all, but the confusion and fear that it puts in people in the context that they may not have God's promise (Holy Spirit) is downright unscriptual and wrong.

satan loves disorder, confusion, fear and separtion from God.

You do the math.

So I guess we're right back to "but if I have no love I am as a sounding gong or a clanging cymbal"

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 09:54 PM
Have you ever heard someone 'talking in tongues' sound like a gong or a symbol? If so, I would direct them to an awesome opportunity with Zildyan (I'm saying this 'tongue in cheek').

tango
Jul 1st 2008, 09:59 PM
Have you ever heard someone 'talking in tongues' sound like a gong or a symbol? If so, I would direct them to an awesome opportunity with Zildyan (I'm saying this 'tongue in cheek').

Would that be a human or angelic tongue wedged firmly in cheek? :lol:

Just out of interest, what are your views on tongues?

godsgirl
Jul 1st 2008, 09:59 PM
some people give satan more power than they do the Lord. My Jesus said, "if you then being evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more then will your Father give the Holy Spirit to those that ask" Too busy looking for snakes and scorpions when that is exactly what Father God said we wouldn't get.:pray:

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 10:11 PM
some people give satan more power than they do the Lord. My Jesus said, "if you then being evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more then will your Father give the Holy Spirit to those that ask" Too busy looking for snakes and scorpions when that is exactly what Father God said we wouldn't get.:pray:

Sure but I think the other point is that not everything that is believed to come from God comes from God. God doesn't give a tongue of gibberish. The Holy tongues is never not understood. It never needs an interpreter because it's purpose is to be understood by anyone who hears it. It will sound like their own original tongue/language.

downpouredlife
Jul 1st 2008, 10:18 PM
Sure but I think the other point is that not everything that is believed to come from God comes from God. God doesn't give a tongue of gibberish. The Holy tongues is never not understood. It never needs an interpreter because it's purpose is to be understood by anyone who hears it. It will sound like their own original tongue/language.

You are coming in a little late in the game, and haven't read 1 Corinthians 14:26-27



What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.


Tongues is probably the most misunderstood Gift of the Spirit - and argued the most heatedly.

cheech
Jul 1st 2008, 10:18 PM
I belong to a Pentecostal church. Some speak in tongues, some do not. I've only heard a couple people pray in tongues out loud every so often but it's not disturbing to the others. Others who may speak in tongues do so softly so as not to disturb the service. It's not a requirement by any means nor does it mean one person is more spiritual than the other. The ones who don't speak in tongues are not pressured to speak it because it is not something that can be taught by man but is a gift given by the Holy Spirit. Don't let anyone tell you different and if they do, provide scripture backing it up.

tango
Jul 1st 2008, 10:20 PM
Sure but I think the other point is that not everything that is believed to come from God comes from God. God doesn't give a tongue of gibberish. The Holy tongues is never not understood. It never needs an interpreter because it's purpose is to be understood by anyone who hears it. It will sound like their own original tongue/language.

I have to disagree here, if tongues never need an interpreter why does Paul refer to the gift of interpretation in 1Co 12:10?

1Co 14:4 refers to the person speaking in tongues edifying himself, which suggests it is uplifting to the person speaking even if nobody (the speaker included) understands what is being said.

sunsetssplendor
Jul 1st 2008, 10:29 PM
I said this the other day in another thread but my old church tried
teaching us how to speak in tongues. It took everything in me
to not burst out laughing. The way he instructed us to rolllll our
tongues and let the air out was such a joke. I am so turned off
by tongue speaking b/c MANY MANY times in the midst of a good
sermon some attention seeker behind me disrupted the service
with that mumbo jumbo!

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 10:31 PM
You are coming in a little late in the game, and haven't read 1 Corinthians 14:26-27

Actually you are wrong on both counts. First, there is no such thing as coming late to a thread lol, plus I posted in this thread before you did ;) Also, I have read 1 Corinthians 14:26-27




What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.
This is speaking about when someone speaks in a foreign language, not in the Holy tongues. The Holy tongues does not need an interpreter because the miracle of it is that everyone can understand it.






Tongues is probably the most misunderstood Gift of the Spirit

Yes that's true. It is also the most improvised and imitated gift.

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 10:33 PM
I have to disagree here, if tongues never need an interpreter why does Paul refer to the gift of interpretation in 1Co 12:10?

1Co 14:4 refers to the person speaking in tongues edifying himself, which suggests it is uplifting to the person speaking even if nobody (the speaker included) understands what is being said.

It is a gift to be able to translate foreign languages in a way that allows the message to be exactly the same from one language to another.

downpouredlife
Jul 1st 2008, 10:45 PM
This is speaking about when someone speaks in a foreign language, not in the Holy tongues. The Holy tongues does not need an interpreter because the miracle of it is that everyone can understand it.

My bad, perhaps you have read it.

Answer this then: Why does Paul say in the same chapter:



"1 Corinthians 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit."


and then referring back to the same gift:



1 Corinthians 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

Clearly this indicates that he who speaks in 'Holy Tongues' as you call it


Speaks a language unintelligible to men
Must accompany the utterance with an interpretation

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 10:52 PM
My bad, perhaps you have read it.

Answer this then: Why does Paul say in the same chapter:



"1 Corinthians 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit."

Because if the people you speak to don't understand the language you are speaking, lets say they speak German and you speak French, then only God will understand you.





and then referring back to the same gift:



1 Corinthians 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.


It is only good to speak to people in a language they already speak or if you or someone else translates/interprets what is said.




Clearly this indicates that he who speaks in 'Holy Tongues' as you call it



Speaks a language unintelligible to men
Must accompany the utterance with an interpretation




No, this is not concerning the Holy tongues from God. Read about it when it was spoken on Pentecost. No translators were needed.

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 10:57 PM
moved to answer another post

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 10:58 PM
I wrote this awhile ago to try to clarify what is being said in these verses:

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an FORIEGN LANGUAGE speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
What good is it to speak in a language no hearer but God can understand?
1 Corinthians 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
1 Corinthians 14:4 He that speaketh in an FORIEGN LANGUAGE edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
If one speaks in a FORIEGN LANGUAGE that only he knows and no other, then he only edifies himself and does nothing good to those who are listening but cannot understand.
1 Corinthians 14:5 I would that ye all spake with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

It is better to speak in an understood language and prophesy rather than speak a FORIEGN LANGUAGE unless you interpret what you are saying in a language that the listeners understand.

1 Corinthians 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

But to come simply speaking in various languages that aren't understood profits no one.

1 Corinthians 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?

It is the same with a musical instrument. What good is playing one if it is randomly played with indistinct sounds?

1 Corinthians 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?

Certain trumpet sounds (short musical pieces) signified certain actions to be carried out. Have you ever heard a trumpet sound at the horse races that tells the racers to begin the race? What if the trumpet made a strange sound no one knew? It would be confusion.

1 Corinthians 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

NEVER utter sounds or imaginary words in a fake supposedly "holy language"! If it is not easily understood by the listener then the speaker has done something WRONG!

1 Corinthians 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
1 Corinthians 14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

915
915 barbaros {bar'-bar-os}

of uncertain derivation; TDNT - 1:546,94; adj

AV - barbarian 5, barbarous 1; 6

1) one whose speech is rude, rough and harsh
2) one who speaks a foreign or strange language which is not
understood by another
3) used by the Greeks of any foreigner ignorant of the Greek
language, whether mental or moral, with the added notion after
the Persian war, of rudeness and brutality. The word is used
in the N.T. without the idea of reproachfulness.


Do not speak and sound like a barbarian. This means do not speak retardedly, in a mumbo-jumbo, gibberish, non-sense, false, made up by YOU "tongue".

1 Corinthians 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

The zealous wish to have evidence of the Holy Spirit so they have invented a false tongue, they call it an unknown tongue but it is what Paul said to NOT do.

1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
1 Corinthians 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
1 Corinthians 14:16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

Here if one speaks in a language unknown to anyone, then how is anyone supposed to know when to say "Amen"? They wouldn't because they cannot understand what is being said and that also applies to the speaker. It is confusion and that is of the devil.

1 Corinthians 14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
1 Corinthians 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with FORIEGN LANGUAGES more than ye all:

Paul spoke many FORIEGN LANGUAGES which is why he was so perfect to go forth and spread the gospel to foreign countries!

1 Corinthians 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

It is better to speak 5 words someone can understand than 10,000 words in a language they cannot. I hope I don't have to explain why that is.

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 11:01 PM
Yikes, my spelling! Sorry

keck553
Jul 1st 2008, 11:03 PM
Naphal, you are correct about minimum word usage. Jesus Himself suggested we pray not the like the pagans (they were wordy and did the mumbo-jumbo)

downpouredlife
Jul 1st 2008, 11:18 PM
I wrote this awhile ago to try to clarify what is being said in these verses:

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an FORIEGN LANGUAGE speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.


Naphal, why would one speak in a 'foreign language' not unto men but unto God? How, if it was a 'foreign language,' could 'no man understand him?'

The answer is in the same verse - because 'in the spirit he speaketh mysteries' It is a spiritual language!

Your translation of the verse is wrong, and makes no sense at all.

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 11:23 PM
Naphal, why would one speak in a 'foreign language' not unto men but unto God? How, if it was a 'foreign language,' could 'no man understand him?'

The answer is in the same verse - because 'in the spirit he speaketh mysteries' It is a spiritual language!

Your translation of the verse is wrong, and makes no sense at all.

The subject is speaking in a foreign language.

1 Corinthians 14:5 I would that ye all spake with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.


This clarifies it. Unless the language is interpreted, then he edifies himself and is only speaking to God. To everyone else, it is a mystery....unless it's interpreted. It is not speaking of the Holy tongues because that language is automatically understood by everyone. When we read of "unknown tongues" it simply means "unknown languages" or what we call "foreign languages".

Whispering Grace
Jul 1st 2008, 11:31 PM
I said this the other day in another thread but my old church tried
teaching us how to speak in tongues. It took everything in me
to not burst out laughing. The way he instructed us to rolllll our
tongues and let the air out was such a joke.

Obviously if someone must be "taught" to do it, it's not from God. I guess I don't understand how that has anything to do with the genuine gift, however.

a sojourner
Jul 1st 2008, 11:55 PM
1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an FORIEGN LANGUAGE speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Which version did you find the translation 'foriegn language' in? I have never seen that before. And I don't think that I ever will, because the Greek word is 'glossalia' which just means tongues. The reason that you won't find a legitimate version translating the word 'glossalia' as 'foreign language,' is that 'foreign language' is really an interpretation of the word, not a direct translation. You have apparently chosen this phrase to give the verse a connotation that may or may not actually exist in the text itself.

In order for 'foreign language' to be considered a legitimate translation, it would have to hold up reasonably well in the other instances that it is used in scripture, right? Let's see how it fares in another verse that uses the word 'glossalia' in exactly the same grammatical case and structure in the Greek as it does in the verse you quoted above.

Acts 2:6 - And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own foreign language.7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?translation=esvp&book=Act&chapter=2#)And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?translation=esvp&book=Act&chapter=2#)And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native foreign language?

Each one heard them in their own native foreign language? Hmm... That doesn't make any sense from a grammatical standpoint (it is obviously contradictory), so let's see if it makes any logical sense.

If the Apostles were literally speaking in earthly foreign languages, which appears to be what you are insisting, then how is it that each person there heard them in their own language? Now, you'll probably come back and say, "Well, each disciple was speaking in a different foreign language!" Maybe, but there is a big clue in the text that doesn't support that line of reasoning. The clue is the words 'bewildered,' and 'amazed and astonished.'

The reason why they were 'bewildered,' and 'amazed and astonished' was that each one of them were hearing the same people speaking in their own native language, even when others were clearly hearing them in their own. How could an earthly language be heard in more than one language? That doesn't make any sense either.

If it seems like I am picking on you, it's because quoting the Holy Scriptures with your own unique interpretation highlighted as though it were part of the original text is dangerous and will confuse some of the believers on this board (and elsewhere) who may not have a firm foundation in Biblical exegesis.

Be careful that your exegesis does not become eisegesis. Those are from the Greek, too. 'Ex' means out of, referring to the process of extracting the meaning of a text. 'Eis' means into, referring to the process of inserting your own ideas into the text.

VerticalReality
Jul 1st 2008, 11:56 PM
First, Like Paul in 1 Cor 13, I was speaking to the hypothetical. You DO know Paul was speaking hypothetically in that verse?

You say that as if I'm supposed to know that . . .

Does Paul say he is speaking hypothetically? Would it be customary for me to say something like . . .

"Though I might speak in languages of English and Martian . . ."

Why in the world would I want to say something like that? What makes you think that Paul is speaking of some "hypothetical" language that doesn't exist?


Secondly, God is a God of order and that is revealed to us not only by the creation, but by His Word in the Scriptures.


Does God define order or do you?


I'm just simply saying that when saying these utterences, you haven't a clue what the content is. I would default to that it means nothing at all, but the confusion and fear that it puts in people in the context that they may not have God's promise (Holy Spirit) is downright unscriptual and wrong.

The Word of God declares that many will not have a clue what the content of the tongues are, which is why an interpreter would be needed. That fact does not make what is spoken meaningless. Additionally, I'm not arguing that if a person does not speak in tongues they do not have the Spirit.


satan loves disorder, confusion, fear and separtion from God.

Satan also loves to rob the body of Christ of power so that others will not be edified. Balance is key. I don't argue there is abuse. However, the approach you are taking here is abuse as well.

Naphal
Jul 1st 2008, 11:58 PM
Which version did you find the translation 'foriegn language' in?

I put that in to clarify what's being addressed. I am aware that the greek word doesn't always mean a foreign language but contextually that's what is being said. People tend to think of some weird other worldly language when they read of "unknown tongues" when all that's being said is "foreign language".

a sojourner
Jul 2nd 2008, 12:25 AM
I put that in to clarify what's being addressed. I am aware that the greek word doesn't always mean a foreign language but contextually that's what is being said. People tend to think of some weird other worldly language when they read of "unknown tongues" when all that's being said is "foreign language".

You clearly didn't read my whole post.

That isn't what is contextually being said, that is a phrase that you are using to give the text the connotation that Paul is referring to earthly languages. That is your interpretation based on your pre-existing ideas that speaking in tongues refers only to speaking in 'foreign (earthly) languages.'

How do I know that it isn't "contextually what is being said?" Because Paul also says this:

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks NOT TO MEN but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 1 Cor 14:2

Paul is clearly saying that the tongue that he is referring to is not an earthly language. If I suddenly get up and speak in Chinese, I'm not uttering 'mysteries in the Spirit,' I'm uttering Chinese!

To drive that point home, consider the further implications of what you are saying. You are saying that the true expression of the gift of tongues is that sometimes people will suddenly know a 'foreign language.' Then, if they do what Paul instructs them to do, they will get up, say a phrase in Chinese, and someone who has the 'gift' of interpreting Chinese is supposed to interpret. In the middle of a church service. This somehow edifies the body.

That doesn't make any sense. It also isn't the context of 1 Corinthians chapter 14.

downpouredlife
Jul 2nd 2008, 12:34 AM
The subject is speaking in a foreign language.

1 Corinthians 14:5 I would that ye all spake with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with FORIEGN LANGUAGES, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.


This clarifies it. Unless the language is interpreted, then he edifies himself and is only speaking to God. To everyone else, it is a mystery....unless it's interpreted. It is not speaking of the Holy tongues because that language is automatically understood by everyone. When we read of "unknown tongues" it simply means "unknown languages" or what we call "foreign languages".

First, there is NOTHING in the Greek to distinguish the tongues spoke in acts from those spoken in the Corinthian Church. It is the same word, the same grammatical structure. Your argument is based on assumption.

Secondly, why would someone stand up in the middle of a church service, and randomly start speaking a foreign language? This also makes no sense, especially because Paul puts the 'tongues' here in the same context as orderly prophecy - also gift of the spirit.

godsgirl
Jul 2nd 2008, 12:54 AM
And if God's Word says "no one understands" then no one understands. Why is that so hard for you to believe? I personally dont think it matters if the tongues we speak are natural languages or 'angelic languages" the point is our understanding is unfruitful-this is why Paul said to pray both ways. He told us plainly that he spoke in languages he himself didn't understand so the idea that Paul just spoke a lot of different langauges doesn't make any sense.

If I pray in a tongue, my understanding is unfruitful, so what shall I do? I will pray with my mind and I will pray with my spirit also. I will sing with my spirit and I will sing with my understanding also.

By the way, to answer a posters question a little ways back. Jesus Himself spoke of the baptism in the Spirit in Acts 1-He called it the promise of the Father. This baptism was poured out on the disciples in Acts 2:4 and at that time they all spoke in tongues as the Spirit gave them the words to say.

keck553
Jul 2nd 2008, 01:38 AM
You say that as if I'm supposed to know that . . .

Does Paul say he is speaking hypothetically? Would it be customary for me to say something like . . .

"Though I might speak in languages of English and Martian . . ."

Why in the world would I want to say something like that? What makes you think that Paul is speaking of some "hypothetical" language that doesn't exist?



Does God define order or do you?



The Word of God declares that many will not have a clue what the content of the tongues are, which is why an interpreter would be needed. That fact does not make what is spoken meaningless. Additionally, I'm not arguing that if a person does not speak in tongues they do not have the Spirit.



Satan also loves to rob the body of Christ of power so that others will not be edified. Balance is key. I don't argue there is abuse. However, the approach you are taking here is abuse as well.

I moved this post from another location. I hope it explains better! God bless!

The purpose of 'tongues' in Acts 2, they can be grouped under two headings: 1) to mark the giving of the Holy Spirit promised by John the Baptist and Jesus for the realization of His world-wide commission, and 2) to mark the beginning of the 'times of the Gentiles," and thus God's judgement against Israel according to the prophets and the words of Jesus in Matthew 21:43. The Spirit was given to bring to fruition the "New Covenant" promised by Jeremiah. Luke is clearly showing that the Shavuot (Pentacost) following Messiah's resurrection as the realization of Jesus' promise that the Spirit would come to aid in the fullfillment of His commands. Remember the commission? The Apostles were to wait before going to evangelize the nations and to wait specifically in Jerusalem and furthermore, wait until the Spirit was given to them by their Master (Acts 1:3-8). Anticipation is demonstrated in the prayer devotion that occurred in Acts 1:14. The only thing coming between the promise, the command, and the ascension of Jesus and the coming of the Holy Spirit is the choosing of Matthias to replace Judas.

The feast of Shavuot also points to the purpose. God is not capricious. Tongues must have a significant story to tell us as to the purpose of the Spirit's coming in this way. the most obvious interpretation dovetails with Jesus' command to the Disciples to evangelize the world in Matt 28:19-20. That he enabled them to speak in different languages was enormously symbolic of the realized new Covenant that would fulfill the prophecy made to thier fathers "in you seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed." And Shavuot (Pentacost), celebrating the harvest, is likewise filled with symbolism as the followers of Jesus are now endowed to reap the harvest of mankind for the glory of God.

Peter seems to hit on this. His quoting of the prophet Joel confirms that God' wouuld give His Spirit to all mankind in the end times, no longer reserving His work only for Israel, and at the giving, it would be marked by prophetic and revealational activity of teh Holy Spirit, and all who call upon God (Jesus) woudl reveive His salvation, regardless of race or national origin. Peter clearly connects Joel to the events of the moment in Acts 2:16. The tongues also functioned as a sign of God's judgement against the nation of Israel and the beginning point of 'the times of the Gentiles." Not so apparent in Acts 2, but reference Joel 2 and it's clearer.

The use of Isaiah 28:11 by Paul in 1 Cor 14 also indicates the purpose of tongues. In verse 21 Paul introduces a quote from Isaiah 28 to substantiate the truth that tongues, so far as being a sign, are for the uinbeleivers, not beleivers (verse 22).

Isaiah 28:11 is instructive. Isaiah prophesies a time when god will speak to unbeleivers and a wayward Israel through stammering lips and a foreign tongue, with the result that they would stumble backward, be broken and taken captive. The same (stammering lips, foreign tongue) is found in Isaiah 33:19. Whike the NASB interpretation of 'stammering tongue is technically possible, the context favors teh more common "to mock" (1 Kings 19:21, Ezekeil 23:32). The use of "lip" in the hebrew לשׁו would render the phrase "with mocking speech", or "manner of speaking." In Genesis 11:1, it's simple rendered "speech". The NIV calls it 'foreign lips.' However, in Hebrew it can also imply derision or mocking, and certainly fits the contextual meaning here.

Isaiah was simply applying a previous prophecy found in Deuteronomy 28:49, where God promises the invasion of foreigners whose langueage would be unknown. As a Torah teacher and Pharisee, Paul certainly would have understood this. he uses the Isaiah passage as indicating the way in which foreign tongues may be used mockingly and as a taunt against Israel, as a sign that the covenant curses, not the blessings, are coming from the hand of God. he therefore attaches the lable 'sign' to the phenomenon as an indicator of fulfilling the prophet's words.

in the immediate context of Isaiah 28:11, the prophey has illustrated the relationship of Israel to God as that of an infant to an adult. God must likewise speak in juvenile style to Israel who is talking with the speech of an infant. In fact, the judgement of God will come from foreigners whose language will be as indistinguishable to them as an adult's speech to an infant's.

Futhermore, in 1 Corinthians 14:20, Paul admonishes the Corinthians not to think like children, but to have mature reasoning. He is following the argument of the prophet he is about to quote - Isaiah !! Paul understand that the fifteenth (Moses), the eigth (Isaiah) and the sixth (Jeremiah) century prophets collectively show God's continuing respect for the Covenant He established with Israel. It's their disobedience that brings the covenant curses. Additionally, Paul follows the structure of Acts 2, in that tongues function as a sign but do not communicate in and of themselves. They point to the prophetic curce precisely by putting the unbeleiver into a state of confusion (verse 23). Unbeleivers entering the asembly while all speakl in tongues will think the church is mad, the exact reaction of the 'unbeleivers' at Shavuot (Pentacost) as recorded. yet, if prophecy is given, as Peter explains the significance of tongues at Shavuot, teh communication of truth in understandible language will bring repentance.

In conclusion, when God speaks to man in a language he cannot understand, rather than being a blessing, this is a curse. In the context of 1 Corinthians 14 then, which finds its setting in the gathered body of Messiah, tongues must be interpreted or else they signal the curse of God upon those hwo hear and do not understand.

My conclusion is that the tongues in Acts 2 were in fact known languages. Anything other than known languages does not fit either the vocabulary used nor the intended purpose, which was two fold - 1) to mark the establishment of the New Covenant and the fulfillment of the promise that "all nations sould be blessed," and to mark the beginning of the era nows as 'the times of the Gentiles" and putting the unbeleiving, national Israel under the judgment of God.

downpouredlife
Jul 2nd 2008, 02:44 AM
Additionally, Paul follows the structure of Acts 2, in that tongues function as a sign but do not communicate in and of themselves. They point to the prophetic curce precisely by putting the unbeleiver into a state of confusion (verse 23). Unbeleivers entering the asembly while all speakl in tongues will think the church is mad, the exact reaction of the 'unbeleivers' at Shavuot (Pentacost) as recorded. yet, if prophecy is given, as Peter explains the significance of tongues at Shavuot, teh communication of truth in understandible language will bring repentance.

I find two major points in error;



The tongues in Acts 2 DID communicate in and of themselves. (verse 8)"Utterly amazed,http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gif they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?" and in verse 11, they clearly understand what is being said, because they say, 'we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!'
If the function of the Gifts of the Spirit is to edify the body, how could they point to a curse? The gifts are a blessing, and do not point to the curse in Isaiah 28, which was against the people of Israel and would therefore not affect Gentile Unbelievers

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 02:53 AM
That isn't what is contextually being said, that is a phrase that you are using to give the text the connotation that Paul is referring to earthly languages. That is your interpretation based on your pre-existing ideas that speaking in tongues refers only to speaking in 'foreign (earthly) languages.'

It's not based on interpretation. It's the result of understanding the entire passage and all scriptures that make reference to speaking in a language. Most are speaking about human languages, some speak of the Holy tongue/language.




How do I know that it isn't "contextually what is being said?" Because Paul also says this:

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks NOT TO MEN but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 1 Cor 14:2

Paul is clearly saying that the tongue that he is referring to is not an earthly language.



Paul doesn't say anything of the sort. All he says is that when you speak a tongue/language that you aren't speaking to men. How can that be if you are speaking to men? It only makes sense if you consider what he says 4 verses ahead about interpreting what is said. That means he is speaking about a language that the men don't understand. God understands all languages. "utters mysteries in the Spirit" is not a reference to non-human languages.





If I suddenly get up and speak in Chinese, I'm not uttering 'mysteries in the Spirit,' I'm uttering Chinese!

But to those who cannot understand it, it is mysteries in the Spirit.





To drive that point home, consider the further implications of what you are saying. You are saying that the true expression of the gift of tongues is that sometimes people will suddenly know a 'foreign language.'

Not that God cannot do that but no, the holy tongues isn't the magical ability to speak a new language. The language itself can be understood by anyone, no matter what languages they know or don't know. No interpreter is needed for the true Holy tongues.






Then, if they do what Paul instructs them to do, they will get up, say a phrase in Chinese, and someone who has the 'gift' of interpreting Chinese is supposed to interpret. In the middle of a church service. This somehow edifies the body.

That doesn't make any sense. It also isn't the context of 1 Corinthians chapter 14.



Actually that is what Paul is talking about. It is man that has turned it into this mystery "tongue" and the magical interpretation. Paul is simply talking about preaching in different languages and the need for that to be translated so the congregation can understand the message. It has nothing whatsoever about the Holy tongues.


Acts 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
Acts 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Acts 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Acts 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Acts 2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Acts 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

When the true tongues is spoken, everyone not only understands it but hears it as if the speaker spoke in their native language. That means someone will hear it in German, and the guy next to him will hear it in French because he was raised speaking French and the other raised speaking German. The speaker didn't speak French or German. It is the miracle of the Holy tongues also called the cloven tongues because it start out in one person and spreads out to all languages.

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 02:56 AM
First, there is NOTHING in the Greek to distinguish the tongues spoke in acts from those spoken in the Corinthian Church. It is the same word, the same grammatical structure. Your argument is based on assumption.

No, it's from the entire context of the passage.




Secondly, why would someone stand up in the middle of a church service, and randomly start speaking a foreign language?



A traveler spreading the gospel to foreign lands would but he would need an interpreter with him or else it would not benefit anyone there for obvious reasons.



This also makes no sense, especially because Paul puts the 'tongues' here in the same context as orderly prophecy - also gift of the spirit.

I don't understand what difference that makes.

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 02:58 AM
He told us plainly that he spoke in languages he himself didn't understand so the idea that Paul just spoke a lot of different languages doesn't make any sense.

Paul never said he spoke in languages he didn't understand. Paul knew many languages and used them when he traveled to spread the gospel. I don't believe Paul ever claims to have spoken in the Holy tongues.

a sojourner
Jul 2nd 2008, 03:30 AM
But to those who cannot understand it, it is mysteries in the Spirit.

So when I turn on 'Telemundo,' are they speaking mysteries in the Spirit?

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 03:32 AM
So when I turn on 'Telemundo,' are they speaking mysteries in the Spirit?

If we keep in context, we are talking about someone preaching in a church not a worldly television show, so no. If you turned it to a Spirit filled preacher, then yes.

a sojourner
Jul 2nd 2008, 03:37 AM
If we keep in context, we are talking about someone preaching in a church not a worldly television show, so no. If you turned it to a Spirit filled preacher, then yes.

So if I turn on the TV, and I see a German minister and a German unbeliever - both speaking German - the minister is uttering mysteries, and the unbeliever is just speaking German?

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 03:45 AM
So if I turn on the TV, and I see a German minister and a German unbeliever - both speaking German - the minister is uttering mysteries, and the unbeliever is just speaking German?

You left out "in the Spirit". That's the difference between an unbeliever and a believer.

a sojourner
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:13 AM
Ok. So the German preacher is uttering mysteries in the Spirit, as you say, because I don't understand what he is saying. But does the German preacher understand what he is saying? Of course he does - because he's just speaking German.

Just like Paul, right? At least, that's what you said below:


Paul never said he spoke in languages he didn't understand. Paul knew many languages and used them when he traveled to spread the gospel. I don't believe Paul ever claims to have spoken in the Holy tongues.

This is not true. Paul obviously spoke in a language that he himself did not understand:

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:13-14

Why would Paul's own mind be unfruitful if he understood what he was saying? No, his mind was unfruitful because his mind did not understand the language that he was speaking. That is why the speaker, and Paul who identifies himself with the hypothetical speaker, needed to pray for an interpretation to their OWN words.

In the verses below Paul clearly contrasts his first statement with his second. The first statement declares that he 'speaks in tongues more than all of you (Corinthians).' In his second statement, which contrasts the first, he says 'I would rather speak five words WITH MY MIND in order to instruct others than ten thousand words IN A TONGUE.'

He's not just making a non sequiter. These aren't two unrelated statements made consecutively. Paul is saying that he would rather preach five words in a language that he understands (WITH HIS MIND) when instructing the church, than ten thousand in a language that he doesn't understand (IN A TONGUE).

I have included the full verse below. Notice that in both statements he uses the exact same word, 'tongue.'

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Cr&chapter=014&version=esvp#)Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue. 1 Cor 14:18-19.

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:33 AM
Ok. So the German preacher is uttering mysteries in the Spirit, as you say, because I don't understand what he is saying. But does the German preacher understand what he is saying? Of course he does - because he's just speaking German.

Yes, unless he doesn't really know German very well.




Just like Paul, right? At least, that's what you said below:



This is not true. Paul obviously spoke in a language that he himself did not understand:

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:13-14



You are misunderstanding what is being said. The translation appears to say that but I'll refer to some scholars that will clarify it:

Gill
but my understanding is unfruitful; that is, what I say with understanding to myself is unprofitable to others, not being understood by them.


Clarke
but my understanding is unfruitful to all others, because they do not understand my prayers, and I either do not or cannot interpret them.

Barnes
But my understanding - (ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ho de nous mou). My intellect, my mind; my mental efforts and operations.
Is unfruitful - Produces nothing that will be of advantage to them. It is like a barren tree; a tree that bears nothing that can be of benefit to others. They cannot understand what I say, and of course, they cannot be profited by what I utter.

Paul wasn't saying he didn't understand his own words but that his understanding would not carry forth to the listeners had he not translated or had a translator.






He's not just making a non sequiter. These aren't two unrelated statements made consecutively. Paul is saying that he would rather preach five words in a language that he understands (WITH HIS MIND) when instructing the church, than ten thousand in a language that he doesn't understand (IN A TONGUE).

What Paul is saying is that it is better to speak 5 words people will understand than 10k words they can't understand. Never does he say he cannot understand what he says.






I have included the full verse below. Notice that in both statements he uses the exact same word, 'tongue.'

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Cr&chapter=014&version=esvp#)Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue. 1 Cor 14:18-19.



Tongue is an older word. The one used more commonly now is "language".

(CEV) I thank God that I speak unknown languages more than any of you.

(GB) I thanke my God, I speake languages more then ye all.


(GW) I thank God that I speak in other languages more than any of you.

(HNV) I thank my God, I speak with other languages more than you all.


(LITV) I thank my God that I speak more languages than all of you.

(MKJV) I thank my God that I speak more languages than all of you;


(WEB) I thank my God, I speak with other languages more than you all.

(Webster) I thank my God, I speak in languages more than ye all:


He is talking about how he can speak more foreign languages than they could.

downpouredlife
Jul 2nd 2008, 05:08 AM
Yes, unless he doesn't really know German very well.
You are misunderstanding what is being said. The translation appears to say that but I'll refer to some scholars that will clarify it:

Gill
but my understanding is unfruitful; that is, what I say with understanding to myself is unprofitable to others, not being understood by them.


Clarke
but my understanding is unfruitful to all others, because they do not understand my prayers, and I either do not or cannot interpret them.

Barnes
But my understanding - (ὁ δὲ νοῦς μουho de nous mou). My intellect, my mind; my mental efforts and operations.
Is unfruitful - Produces nothing that will be of advantage to them. It is like a barren tree; a tree that bears nothing that can be of benefit to others. They cannot understand what I say, and of course, they cannot be profited by what I utter.

Paul wasn't saying he didn't understand his own words but that his understanding would not carry forth to the listeners had he not translated or had a translator.



Naphal, direct translation of the Greek says that Paul is saying "My own understanding." The 'understanding of others' is nowhere in the verse -

Barnes and Gill added that phrase. Look for yourself.

You cannot use an added non scriptural phrase to prove a point within a verse. Otherwise, you could change the meaning of anything. Watch this:

Matt 6:22-23


http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/icon_note.gif"The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are bad, meaning you don't have 20/20 physical vision, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

Oh no! Because I wear glasses, I'm filled with spiritual darkness!

Naphal
Jul 2nd 2008, 05:11 AM
Naphal, direct translation of the Greek says that Paul is saying "My own understanding." The 'understanding of others' is nowhere in the verse -

Barnes and Gill added that phrase. Look for yourself.

You don't have to agree, but that's what Paul was saying.

JesusMySavior
Jul 2nd 2008, 07:16 AM
The Bible is very clear on this issue. Some will speak in tongues, some will not. Paul said love is more important than every spiritual gift. We should desire them but if we don't love one another, it's useless.

I think the practice of "forcing" people to speak tongues is not only against scripture, it is completely and totally ungodly. It is the spirit of the antichrist. It is saying "i'm going to MAKE you speak in tongues so I can make sure that you are saved".

This kind of practice is nothing more than glorified religion. Pentecostal churches, though they may be "radical" are just as religious as the other sects.



Christ alone is our righteousness. Never forget that. Christ Himself said "People will know you are my disciples because you love one another" (John 13:35). Paul gave us wisdom when he wrote to the Galatians, "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. Against such there is no law" (5:23-24). Nowhere in there does it say speaking in tongues is a "fruit of the Spirit".


Now I believe that God has gifted me with tongues. There's times where I'm so heavy in prayer for certain things or people and I just can't say it all. The words are too many, and it all spills out in a babble. That's how I'd explain it. It spills out. Now, if I don't have faith that I'm speaking in tongues, the tongues disappear. But if I am speaking tongues with much faith and belief that it is truly a gift from God, it is more intelligible and appears to be more authentic. The fact that faith plays a part in it could be a huge indicator that it IS from God. But I hear lots of people say it's a bunch of bologna and it's a dead gift.

What's most important is if they love one another. I could care less about a person's "tongue" if they can't help their fellow brother or share an encouraging word.

We have too many people being religious these days, and on the other side of the fence, we have people being "spiritual".

Neither one is right. Just be yourself and let God lead you. My goodness already!

downpouredlife
Jul 2nd 2008, 01:18 PM
You don't have to agree, but that's what Paul was saying.

You have yet to prove it! A commentary is just a commentary, it is NOT scripture. Use only scripture, and it's context - you cannot ever prove what scripture says with a non-historical source outside of it! Prove it with scripture.

It seems you can't do that! So how can I agree with something that is not proven in scripture? It would be foolish to do so.

I can prove that God says we are filled with spiritual darkness if we wear glasses by using your reasoning. Doesn't that bug you?

keck553
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:08 PM
I find two major points in error;



The tongues in Acts 2 DID communicate in and of themselves. (verse 8)"Utterly amazed,http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gifhttp://media.salemwebnetwork.com/biblestudytools/skin/CW/Icon_CrossRef_wht_bg.gif they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?" and in verse 11, they clearly understand what is being said, because they say, 'we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!'
If the function of the Gifts of the Spirit is to edify the body, how could they point to a curse? The gifts are a blessing, and do not point to the curse in Isaiah 28, which was against the people of Israel and would therefore not affect Gentile Unbelievers


1. I agree with the reality of the situation. I was referring to the unbeleiver's not hearing the message as prophesied in Isaiah 28. Perhaps my phrasing is confusing. I apologize for that.

2. God is no respector of persons. In the latter chapters of Acts (I can't recall exactly, but I will search), Paul tells the Athenians that up to this point God 'overlooked' Gentile idol worshipping, etc. Up to this point. After that point, I would assume the Gentile unbeleivers fall into the same category as Jewish unbelievers. Both have heard the Gospel and rejected it, therefore both are subject to the curse of God and not given the gift offered through Messiah.

keck553
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:34 PM
You say that as if I'm supposed to know that . . .

Does Paul say he is speaking hypothetically? Would it be customary for me to say something like . . .

He doesn't have to. Obviously at the time Paul wasn't suffering the circumstances he is alluding to. Has his body been burned? Did he fathom all mysteries, know all things, did he have the faith to move mountains? So, what is the tongues of angels? From Paul's point of view, as a Torah teacher, a Pharisee discipled under Gamaleil, his only reference to 'angel tongue' wouold be from the TeNaKh which tells us angels talked in concise and clear Hebrew. Nowhere is there reference to angels using acstatic utterence for Paul to allude to this form of communication. Paul was never unscriptual. Everything he stated was straight from scripture, from the Torah, from the Prophets and from the Writings.



"Though I might speak in languages of English and Martian . . ."

Why in the world would I want to say something like that? What makes you think that Paul is speaking of some "hypothetical" language that doesn't exist?

Again all references to angel talk is clear and concise and in Hebrew (possibly Greek)


Does God define order or do you?

I quoted scripture.
1Co 14:33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.



The Word of God declares that many will not have a clue what the content of the tongues are, which is why an interpreter would be needed. That fact does not make what is spoken meaningless. Additionally, I'm not arguing that if a person does not speak in tongues they do not have the Spirit.

Isaiah 28 declares this for unbeleivers; they don't need an interpreter, for the words they don't understand are curses (according to Isaiah). Interpreters are needed for people who speak foreign languages, which makes sense because there were people from many nations there. Of course you last comment is correct.



Satan also loves to rob the body of Christ of power so that others will not be edified. Balance is key. I don't argue there is abuse. However, the approach you are taking here is abuse as well.

satan loves to separate people from God, His will and His purposes. The abuse that stems from this practice certainly does that.

How am I being abusive? Have I made a statement concerning the hearts, the salvation, or the sanctification of people who vocalize acstatic utterances? I'm just repeating what the word of God says in the correct context.

sunsetssplendor
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:48 PM
This subject always causes a lot of division and frankly I don't
think we'll know the truth until Jesus comes. Personally the people
I've witnessed seemed to be faking it and trying to out do their
neighbor. JMHO

davidandme
Jul 2nd 2008, 04:53 PM
Ok. So the German preacher is uttering mysteries in the Spirit, as you say, because I don't understand what he is saying. But does the German preacher understand what he is saying? Of course he does - because he's just speaking German.

Just like Paul, right? At least, that's what you said below:



This is not true. Paul obviously spoke in a language that he himself did not understand:

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:13-14

Why would Paul's own mind be unfruitful if he understood what he was saying? No, his mind was unfruitful because his mind did not understand the language that he was speaking. That is why the speaker, and Paul who identifies himself with the hypothetical speaker, needed to pray for an interpretation to their OWN words.

In the verses below Paul clearly contrasts his first statement with his second. The first statement declares that he 'speaks in tongues more than all of you (Corinthians).' In his second statement, which contrasts the first, he says 'I would rather speak five words WITH MY MIND in order to instruct others than ten thousand words IN A TONGUE.'

He's not just making a non sequiter. These aren't two unrelated statements made consecutively. Paul is saying that he would rather preach five words in a language that he understands (WITH HIS MIND) when instructing the church, than ten thousand in a language that he doesn't understand (IN A TONGUE).

I have included the full verse below. Notice that in both statements he uses the exact same word, 'tongue.'

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Cr&chapter=014&version=esvp#)Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue. 1 Cor 14:18-19.

1 Cor 14:14 is one of the most missundertood verses in the Bible. The problem is with the English traslation from the original Greek. This doctrine of a prayer language is based mainly upon 1 Corinthians 14:14 where Paul says, "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."
They interpret this to mean that when Paul prayed in the Spirit, he used a "heavenly tongue" and did not himself know what he was praying. This theory raises an important question. How would the supplicant ever know if his prayer was answered
So what is Paul really saying in 1 Corinthians 14:14 The problem in understanding this verse comes largely from the cumbersome translation. Please allow me to rephrase the verse in modern English: "If I pray in a language those around me do not know, I might be praying with the Spirit, but my thoughts would be unfruitful for those listening." Paul is adamant that if we pray out loud, we should either pray so others around us can understand or else keep quiet

keck553
Jul 2nd 2008, 06:07 PM
I agree. The same Greek word is expressed as the different languages spoked in Acts 2 as is used in the later chapters. Throughout the Book of Acts, the Greek term used for tongues is consistently the one that referes to normal languages. Interestingly througout Acts, the Greek expression is used in plural form, indicating a multiple of languages. Gibberish, or acstatic utterances could never appear in the plural form becaue there aren't multiple forms of gibberish. There is no such word as 'gibberishes' because the term is nonclassifiable into more than one.

The same goes for 1 Cor 14. When Paul used the singular in verses 2,4 13,14 and 19, he was referring to the counterfiet pagan gibberish that was being used by many of the Corinthian beleivers instead of the true gift of languages. Whenever Paul wanted to refer to the real gift of languages, he used the plural. The only exception I can find is 1 Cor 14:27, where Paul was referring to the real gift but mentioning a single man speaking a single language which demands a single (not plural) form.

The interpretation that Paul claimes a spurious use of tongues at Corinth, which he donates in the singular Greek, bit does not point out what makes it spurious and leaves the reader to 'read between the lines' in order to understand his message is a very weak argument. Paul is known for coming to the issue and speaking directly to the problems at hand. It is inconceivable that he would simply say nothing negative about such spurious speech whike all through his treatise he evidences his awareness of their existence. It is beyond Paul's nature to think he would have admitted that someone actually gave thanks to God while using a selfish, false experience of a babbling tongue. The exegesis simply does not support it.

Again, in 1 Cor 14, I have been told by Charismatics that tongues used in a private or individual way are to be clearly distinguished from tongues used in congregational gatherings. They claim Paul is writing about his private usage in chapter 14, teaching the Corinthians how confusion of the private with the corporate tongue leads to problems. Some told me it's for the prayer closet. Others have claimed it's fine in congregational gathering. But what does Paul really teach? Chapter's 12 and 13 stress over and over again that spiritual gifts are to be used for the edification of the body, not for self gain. It is inconsistant that regarding the whole previous argument that in 14 he would commend people for personal edification. What about the prayer closet? The context does not support that either. Spiritual gifts are given 'for the common good' (1 Cor 12:7). If 'tongues' were used in private, it would have to be admitted that they stand alone as the only spiritual gift which is not 'others-oriented.'

Some will point to 1 Cor 14:2 when Paul says that one who speaks in a tongue "speaks to God" and in verse 4 'edifies himself.' Paul is not accusing the Corinthians of impropriety in their zeal to worship God. he is not questioning thier desire to praise and worship. He is merely teaching them that in the corporate body God is better praised when a agape-type love governs the use of spiritual gifts. When praising God as a congregation, teh ability for all to join in is very important. Apparently, the Corinth church was failing in this measure. Each worshipped on their own, without thought for others. To be caught up in one's own worship may have personal effects and edify oneself, but ultimately this edification is short-circuited, since the body must grow up together to the stature of Messiah (Ephesians 4:13-14). Paul isn't questioning the motive of the one speaking in a tongue and speaking to God alone. It's not the motive. It's the method that's lacking.

The words employed here as well as the syntax and exegesis of these passages support the interpretation of tongues in the Apostolic Scriptures (New Testament) as a whole were in fact known, foreign languages.

tango
Jul 2nd 2008, 06:10 PM
1 Cor 14:14 is one of the most missundertood verses in the Bible. The problem is with the English traslation from the original Greek. This doctrine of a prayer language is based mainly upon 1 Corinthians 14:14 where Paul says, "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."
They interpret this to mean that when Paul prayed in the Spirit, he used a "heavenly tongue" and did not himself know what he was praying. This theory raises an important question. How would the supplicant ever know if his prayer was answered
So what is Paul really saying in 1 Corinthians 14:14 The problem in understanding this verse comes largely from the cumbersome translation. Please allow me to rephrase the verse in modern English: "If I pray in a language those around me do not know, I might be praying with the Spirit, but my thoughts would be unfruitful for those listening." Paul is adamant that if we pray out loud, we should either pray so others around us can understand or else keep quiet

It's not simply a question of knowing if a prayer was answered. What about times when you want to praise God for his great goodness but English just doesn't go far enough. If God has given you the gift why not praise him more even if you don't understand the words yourself?

I still don't see how your interpretation of 1Co 14:14 fits in with the gift of interpretation. I also struggle to understand how, using your interpretation, we can know whether to pray aloud in tongues given we cannot possibly know who is within earshot and what languages they may understand.

timmyb
Jul 2nd 2008, 06:45 PM
when your spirit prays, you do not know exactly what he is saying and no one around you do.... when you pray you build yourself up... it's not meant for anyone... praying in the spirit is not for the ministry...

the ONLY time you need an interpreter is if the Spirit is prophesying in an unknown tongue... if you are speaking German, then someone in the room who doesn't believe will hear and praise God... that's the tongue that's the sign for the unbeliever

but prayer in the Spirit is only for the one praying... it's private... the spirit making intercession in groanings that cannot be uttered as well as just simply praying in tongues

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 01:52 AM
You have yet to prove it! A commentary is just a commentary, it is NOT scripture. Use only scripture, and it's context - you cannot ever prove what scripture says with a non-historical source outside of it! Prove it with scripture.

I have proven it with scripture and I quoted experts in the field of Greek translation to explain the mistake you make by misunderstanding what Paul was saying. If you do not yield to the authority of people educated in the Greek language and that devoted their lives to it and the proper understanding of the scriptures then what more can I do?

downpouredlife
Jul 3rd 2008, 02:39 AM
I have proven it with scripture and I quoted experts in the field of Greek translation to explain the mistake you make by misunderstanding what Paul was saying. If you do not yield to the authority of people educated in the Greek language and that devoted their lives to it and the proper understanding of the scriptures then what more can I do?

You quoted commentaries. It's a little different - Gil and Calvin etc were giving their comments on their interpretation of the Greek. They added in a whole phrase: "therefore others don't understand me" that is not in the Greek at all. It's not a translation, it's an opinion.

Anyway, you never answered my last point: According to you, (what with the whole German Preacher example) Paul knew a lot of languages and spoke them poorly, which is apparently why he didn't understand with his mind and couldn't make himself clear.

Sounds a little ridiculous to me - because according to you, people were standing up in Corinth, speaking languages they didn't know well and therefore had trouble comprehending with their minds, and Paul was saying "Hey guys, that's great if you want to practice French and all, but only do it during your personal prayer time, unless you have an interpreter present."

It just isn't very convincing.

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 03:02 AM
You quoted commentaries. It's a little different - Gil and Calvin etc were giving their comments on their interpretation of the Greek. They added in a whole phrase: "therefore others don't understand me" that is not in the Greek at all. It's not a translation, it's an opinion.

It's less of an opinion when you are dealing with translating a Greek phrase into english. All the scholars I know of agree that Paul was talking about his knowledge being transferred to listeners in that passage not that Paul couldn't understand himself. He wasn't even speaking of himself but was using an example of something that shouldn't happen but that's beside the point.



Anyway, you never answered my last point: According to you, (what with the whole German Preacher example) Paul knew a lot of languages and spoke them poorly, which is apparently why he didn't understand with his mind and couldn't make himself clear.

have you ever read this?

2 Corinthians 11:6 But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things.

rude

The word Rude doesn't mean "mean", it means to be unskilled or uneducated. Paul was speaking about his ability to converse in greek. He was fluent in Hebrew because that was his native language.

2399
2399 idiotes {id-ee-o'-tace}
from 2398; TDNT - 3:215,348; n m
AV - unlearned 3, ignorant 1, rude 1; 5
1) a private person as opposed to a magistrate, ruler, king
2) a common soldier, as opposed to a military officer
3) a writer of prose as opposed to a poet
4) in the NT, an unlearned, illiterate, man as opposed to the
learned and educated: one who is unskilled in any art

NT:2399
idiotes (id-ee-o'-tace); from NT:2398; a private person, i.e. (by implication) an ignoramus (compare "idiot"):

KJV - ignorant, rude, unlearned.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Paul could speak other languages but he wasn't very fluent in them as he was in Hebrew etc.

davidandme
Jul 3rd 2008, 03:06 AM
"therefore others don't understand me"

1 Cor 14:14 is one of the most missundertood verses in the Bible. The problem is with the English traslation from the original Greek. This doctrine of a prayer language is based mainly upon 1 Corinthians 14:14 where Paul says, "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."
They interpret this to mean that when Paul prayed in the Spirit, he used a "heavenly tongue" and did not himself know what he was praying. This theory raises an important question. How would the supplicant ever know if his prayer was answered
So what is Paul really saying in 1 Corinthians 14:14 The problem in understanding this verse comes largely from the cumbersome translation. Please allow me to rephrase the verse in modern English: "If I pray in a language those around me do not know, I might be praying with the Spirit, but my thoughts would be unfruitful for those listening." Paul is adamant that if we pray out loud, we should either pray so others around us can understand or else keep quiet.

davidandme
Jul 3rd 2008, 03:16 AM
What about times when you want to praise God for his great goodness but English just doesn't go far enough.

How can you praise God, if you don't really understand what you are saying? Praising is not just an emotion. Praising the Lord is acknowleging with our understanding, His goodness. God is not an author of confusion. God bless.

keck553
Jul 3rd 2008, 05:10 PM
If English doesn't go far enough, then unintelligible speech certainly doesn't. Now many people can pray without vocalizing, because we can impress a concept on our minds sans language. I beleive God does understand this, howver, Jesus and Paul both teach us not to go on and on in prayer "like that pagans do". If God incarnate Himself says that, I tend to listen!

Whispering Grace
Jul 3rd 2008, 06:35 PM
howver, Jesus and Paul both teach us not to go on and on in prayer "like that pagans do". If God incarnate Himself says that, I tend to listen!

Jesus told us not to use "vain repetitions". He never said "Do not go on and on in prayer".

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 07:24 PM
Jesus told us not to use "vain repetitions". He never said "Do not go on and on in prayer".

It speaks of both.

I have heard the so-called tongues many times and it has always been vain repetitions IMO. The person usually is creating all the sounds and trying to make it seem like some other worldly language and the result is the repeating of many of the "words" being said....over and over. Their "tongues" is a loose fitting of a handful of certain sounds and "words" that falls short of any real language.


Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

945
945 battologeo {bat-tol-og-eh'-o}

from Battos (a proverbial stammerer) and 3056; TDNT - 1:597,103; v

AV - use vain repetitions 1; 1

1) to stammer
2) to repeat the same things over and over, to use many idle
words, to babble, prate. Some suppose the word derived from
Battus, a king of Cyrene, who is said to have stuttered;
others from Battus, an author of tedious and wordy poems.

Ever heard the "tongues" being stammered out like babbled gibberish? I know I have! :)

godsgirl
Jul 3rd 2008, 08:04 PM
It speaks of both.

I have heard the so-called tongues many times and it has always been vain repetitions IMO. The person usually is creating all the sounds and trying to make it seem like some other worldly language and the result is the repeating of many of the "words" being said....over and over. Their "tongues" is a loose fitting of a handful of certain sounds and "words" that falls short of any real language.


Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

945
945 battologeo {bat-tol-og-eh'-o}

from Battos (a proverbial stammerer) and 3056; TDNT - 1:597,103; v

AV - use vain repetitions 1; 1

1) to stammer
2) to repeat the same things over and over, to use many idle
words, to babble, prate. Some suppose the word derived from
Battus, a king of Cyrene, who is said to have stuttered;
others from Battus, an author of tedious and wordy poems.

Ever heard the "tongues" being stammered out like babbled gibberish? I know I have! :)


You will find that those who do not believe that tongues are still for us today are the ones who use "divisive" wording-like that above. Our Father has promised that when we ask for the Holy Spirit we will not receive a stone or a scorpion-those who insist that tongues are not part of what God has for His children think that - that is exactly what we've received.

I will believe God.

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 08:15 PM
You will find that those who do not believe that tongues are still for us today are the ones who use "divisive" wording-like that above.

In other words quote the bible and show a Greek definition...

I think it's supposed to be divisive to show that the bible opposes praying "in vain repetition" and stammering/babbling on and on like the heathen do :)



Our Father has promised that when we ask for the Holy Spirit we will not receive a stone or a scorpion-those who insist that tongues are not part of what God has for His children think that - that is exactly what we've received.

Sure but not everything that comes out of our mouths came from God. I and others are trying to show that the stammering, babble type of "tongues" isn't from God and that the NT speaks against it.

tango
Jul 3rd 2008, 08:41 PM
How can you praise God, if you don't really understand what you are saying? Praising is not just an emotion. Praising the Lord is acknowleging with our understanding, His goodness. God is not an author of confusion. God bless.

I'm not talking about confusion, I'm talking about praying to God even if I don't understand the words I am using. I'm also talking about something done in private so it's not for show either.

Let me use a couple of specific examples. Some time ago I was praying for a friend who was suffering a lot of pain. I figured (or discerned, take your pick) that this person needed spiritual comfort more than physical comfort, so I prayed for that. The next time I spoke with this person they said how it was exactly what they had needed. So I guess you could say the Spirit guided my prayers, and on that occasion I prayed purely in my native English.

Another time I was praying for someone who was severely troubled. This person was a friend of a friend, and so I didn't know a whole lot of detail about their situation. On that occasion I prayed to God in a tongue I didn't understand. God knew what this second person needed even if I didn't, and leaving things purely to me would have ended up with a very vague prayer along the lines of "God, please fix whatever is wrong with (name)".

I'd say both cases were guided by the Spirit, the second being a classic example of 1Co 14:4, "he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself".

I guess the bottom line is that if you believe in the gift of tongues you will use it. If you don't believe in it then don't use it. But I really don't think there is any Scriptural basis for telling people that they shouldn't use the gifts of the Spirit, as guided by the Spirit. There's a big difference between making up some gobbledegook to try and impress people, and using a genuine gift of the Spirit for its intended purpose.

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 08:44 PM
There's a big difference between making up some gobbledegook to try and impress people, and using a genuine gift of the Spirit for its intended purpose.

Yes, the one is false and wicked and the other is Holy. All I and others are doing is saying exactly what you are saying. The problem comes in when people who do the "gobbledegook" and think it's from God hear that it's not from God. They don't want to hear that.

godsgirl
Jul 3rd 2008, 09:51 PM
So-now, are you the "gobbledegook" judge? What makes one persons praying in tongues 'gobbledegook"-and another persons not? "False and wicked" are sharp judgements-do you have scripture to show you which "tongues speakers" are of the devil and which are not?

JesusMySavior
Jul 3rd 2008, 09:52 PM
when your spirit prays, you do not know exactly what he is saying and no one around you do.... when you pray you build yourself up... it's not meant for anyone... praying in the spirit is not for the ministry...

the ONLY time you need an interpreter is if the Spirit is prophesying in an unknown tongue... if you are speaking German, then someone in the room who doesn't believe will hear and praise God... that's the tongue that's the sign for the unbeliever

but prayer in the Spirit is only for the one praying... it's private... the spirit making intercession in groanings that cannot be uttered as well as just simply praying in tongues


I agree with this one. :idea:

JesusMySavior
Jul 3rd 2008, 09:56 PM
As a side note,

this thread needs a huge BOOST of love. We're quarreling here, brothers and sisters.


I'm going to extend a hug to each and every one of you's.


:hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug:


and a holy kiss! :kiss: :saint:

godsgirl
Jul 3rd 2008, 09:57 PM
In other words quote the bible and show a Greek definition...

I think it's supposed to be divisive to show that the bible opposes praying "in vain repetition" and stammering/babbling on and on like the heathen do :)




Sure but not everything that comes out of our mouths came from God. I and others are trying to show that the stammering, babble type of "tongues" isn't from God and that the NT speaks against it.

what is "stammering babble type of tongues? Can you give me an example of that? What is stammering babbling gibberish?

For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

JesusMySavior
Jul 3rd 2008, 09:57 PM
Here's 12 more...


:hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug:


that should cover it :)

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 10:54 PM
So-now, are you the "gobbledegook" judge?
Are you saying no Christian is capable if judging between fake tongues and the true tongues of God?


What makes one persons praying in tongues 'gobbledegook"-and another persons not?

Stammering, repetitive non-sense while the true tongues is clear and understandable by everyone.




"False and wicked" are sharp judgements-do you have scripture to show you which "tongues speakers" are of the devil and which are not?

Yes. Scroll back up and read the scriptures we have been discussing.

Naphal
Jul 3rd 2008, 11:00 PM
what is "stammering babble type of tongues? Can you give me an example of that? What is stammering babbling gibberish?



Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

945
945 battologeo {bat-tol-og-eh'-o}

from Battos (a proverbial stammerer) and 3056; TDNT - 1:597,103; v

AV - use vain repetitions 1; 1

1) to stammer
2) to repeat the same things over and over, to use many idle
words, to babble, prate. Some suppose the word derived from
Battus, a king of Cyrene, who is said to have stuttered;
others from Battus, an author of tedious and wordy poems.





For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people

Yes but this is not a good thing. It's an insult to them because of their low intelligence:

Matthew Henry:

Isa 28:9-13 -
The prophet here complains of the wretched stupidity of this people, that they were unteachable and made no improvement of the means of grace which they possessed; they still continued as they were, their mistakes not rectified, their hearts not renewed, nor their lives reformed. Observe,
I. What it was that their prophets and ministers designed and aimed at. It was to teach them knowledge, the knowledge of God and his will, and to make them understand doctrine, Isa_28:9. This is God's way of dealing with men, to enlighten men's minds first with the knowledge of his truth, and thus to gain their affections, and bring their wills into a compliance with his laws; thus he enters in by the door, whereas the thief and the robber climb up another way.

godsgirl
Jul 4th 2008, 12:01 AM
[quote=Naphal;1696433]Are you saying no Christian is capable if judging between fake tongues and the true tongues of God?




Stammering, repetitive non-sense while the true tongues is clear and understandable by everyone.





Yes. Scroll back up and read the scriptures we have been discussing.[/quote



No, I do not know any Christians that speak in fake tongues? Why would they want to? Do you? How do they do that? I know in the scripture Paul rebuked the Corinthians for using their prayer tongue in public but he never said that they were "fake". Why would a Christian fake anything? Can you as a Christian fake prayer of any kind? If the Holy Spirit gives you the words to say-then how can you say someone elses prayer is "fake"? If a Christian is "faking" speaking in other tongues-does he/she know it? How about prayer in their native langauge, can they fake that too? Why or why not?




True tongues are "clear and understandable by everyone?" Can you explain what you mean by that?

Paul said, "he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man but to God-indeed no one understands, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries"

If no one understands, then how could they be "understandable by everyone"?

Have you ever spoke in other tongues? When another is praying-which is what most speaking in tongues is-do you have the right to say-this one is praying-this one isn't? Is the criteria for your judgement-your understanding? If not, then what is? Do you think if the words are slurred together or it sounds like groaning to you it isn't prayer...I'm just asking-what your criteria is for judgement?

You haven't given any scripture to show that tongues are 'vain repetition" you've just given your opinion that they are.

Paul said, that he thanked God he spoke in tongues more than any of the rest--was he using "vain repetition" or speaking gobbledegook? How have you made your judgement?

Naphal
Jul 4th 2008, 12:15 AM
True tongues are "clear and understandable by everyone?" Can you explain what you mean by that?

Sure. As I have said many times, the true Holy tongues that comes from God never needs an interpreter because it is always understood by anyone no matter what languages they speak or don't speak.





Paul said, "he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man but to God-indeed no one understands, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries"

If no one understands, then how could they be "understandable by everyone"?



It's a matter of context. This is about speaking a human tongue not the Holy tongue.



You haven't given any scripture to show that tongues are 'vain repetition" you've just given your opinion that they are.

I am not saying all tongues are 'vain repetition' and stammering non-sense but everytime I hear someone claim to speak in tongues in a church it has always been the fake, stammering tongues that scriptures speaks against.



Paul said, that he thanked God he spoke in tongues more than any of the rest--was he using "vain repetition" or speaking gobbledegook? How have you made your judgement?


Yes he could speak in more languages than the others but that doesn't mean he spoke in the holy tongues and he certainly never spoke in a vain repetition, stammering non-sense! How do I know that for sure? Because Paul had knowledge straight from God, no one taught him the heavenly truths which means he would never fake tongues like that.

You need to start separating the true Holy tongues from fake Holy tongues. You do this by knowing that any babbling non-sense is the fake one! Also, discerning between the Holy tongues and normal human tongues. That's another way of saying languages. There are three different categories of tongues to be aware of in scripture! and there are thousands of tongues/langauges in the world!

godsgirl
Jul 4th 2008, 12:33 AM
I'm sorry, but you've got some strange and unBiblical ideas-can you bring scriptures for your "true holy tongue" and "fake holy tongue" thoughts?

If Paul was speaking in "more languages than anyone" which isn't scrptural anyway--I never read that in the book? he would still understand what he was saying when he prayed. But he said, he didn't he said, he prayed with the spirit AND understanding because when he prayed in spirit his understanding was unfruitul-now if he knew the langague he was praying in then his understanding wouldn't be unfruitful.

I pray in tongues quite often too-but I've never "faked it" either-and I stand on the Word of God not your opinion.

To be honest, I believe your post is "babbling nonsense".

BroRog
Jul 4th 2008, 12:39 AM
I'm not talking about confusion, I'm talking about praying to God even if I don't understand the words I am using. I'm also talking about something done in private so it's not for show either.

Let me use a couple of specific examples. Some time ago I was praying for a friend who was suffering a lot of pain. I figured (or discerned, take your pick) that this person needed spiritual comfort more than physical comfort, so I prayed for that. The next time I spoke with this person they said how it was exactly what they had needed. So I guess you could say the Spirit guided my prayers, and on that occasion I prayed purely in my native English.

Another time I was praying for someone who was severely troubled. This person was a friend of a friend, and so I didn't know a whole lot of detail about their situation. On that occasion I prayed to God in a tongue I didn't understand. God knew what this second person needed even if I didn't, and leaving things purely to me would have ended up with a very vague prayer along the lines of "God, please fix whatever is wrong with (name)".

I'd say both cases were guided by the Spirit, the second being a classic example of 1Co 14:4, "he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself".

I guess the bottom line is that if you believe in the gift of tongues you will use it. If you don't believe in it then don't use it. But I really don't think there is any Scriptural basis for telling people that they shouldn't use the gifts of the Spirit, as guided by the Spirit. There's a big difference between making up some gobbledegook to try and impress people, and using a genuine gift of the Spirit for its intended purpose.

Tango,

What you are talking about is not the gift of tongues. Rather, it sounds more like Holy Spirit intercession as written in Romans 8.

26 And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for [us] with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to [the will of] God.

These groanings are not to be confused with the supernatural gift of tongues. Our groanings are quite natural. Nothing unusual about them and we all groan from time to time. As Paul says, the spirit knows what we need already, so no words are really necessary.

But if we are going to learn to discern the authentic from the fake, we need to be precise in our definitions. The gift of tongues is the ability to speak another language that you have never learned before. And the purpose is so that a person from another country can hear and understand the Gospel in order to be saved.

Naphal
Jul 4th 2008, 12:43 AM
I pray in tongues quite often too-but I've never "faked it" either-

Oh? Tell us what you say when you speak in tongues? Can you type out the words here in a post? I'd like to take a look at it. Thanks!

BroRog
Jul 4th 2008, 12:49 AM
I'm sorry, but you've got some strange and unBiblical ideas-can you bring scriptures for your "true holy tongue" and "fake holy tongue" thoughts?

If Paul was speaking in "more languages than anyone" which isn't scrptural anyway--I never read that in the book? he would still understand what he was saying when he prayed. But he said, he didn't he said, he prayed with the spirit AND understanding because when he prayed in spirit his understanding was unfruitul-now if he knew the langague he was praying in then his understanding wouldn't be unfruitful.

I pray in tongues quite often too-but I've never "faked it" either-and I stand on the Word of God not your opinion.

To be honest, I believe your post is "babbling nonsense".

Naphal is correct godsgirl. The gift of tongues is the supernatural ability to speak a foreign language, one that you have never learned.

Paul's statement was not an indicative as in, "I pray in my spirit but my mind is unfruitful". Rather, his statement was a conditional statement, followed by a question.

If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What then?

This isn't something Paul is doing. Rather, this is something the Corinthians are doing, which prompts Paul to question it. You say you are praying in your spirit while your mind is unfruitful? Well, Paul says,

I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also.

See the comparison? Unlike some of the Corinthians, Paul prays with both his spirit and his mind.

Naphal
Jul 4th 2008, 12:53 AM
Better said than I said it many posts ago, thanks!



Naphal is correct godsgirl. The gift of tongues is the supernatural ability to speak a foreign language, one that you have never learned.

Paul's statement was not an indicative as in, "I pray in my spirit but my mind is unfruitful". Rather, his statement was a conditional statement, followed by a question.

If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What then?

This isn't something Paul is doing. Rather, this is something the Corinthians are doing, which prompts Paul to question it. You say you are praying in your spirit while your mind is unfruitful? Well, Paul says,

I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also.

See the comparison? Unlike some of the Corinthians, Paul prays with both his spirit and his mind.

godsgirl
Jul 4th 2008, 11:34 AM
Oh? Tell us what you say when you speak in tongues? Can you type out the words here in a post? I'd like to take a look at it. Thanks!


Ummm, can you tell me why you want me to do that?

godsgirl
Jul 4th 2008, 11:49 AM
Paul aswered his own question...he said, "if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my understanding is unfruitful, so what shall I do? I will pray with my mind and I will pray with my spirit also, I will sing with my spirit and I will sing with my understanding also"

He obviously did both. So do we, we certianly don't go around praying in tongues to the exclusion of all else. Now, yes, when one prays in tongues one usually does know what one is praying about...but the details are left to the Holy Spirit---let me give you an example.

About 5 years ago-not too long after my spouse and I were baptised in the Holy Spirit and began to pray this way. We both felt an urgency to pray-my brother-whom I didn't have much contact with kept coming to mind and his face was in my mind as I prayed-I prayed the best I could for him in English-but the "urgency" did not leave-and so I began to pray with the words the Holy Spirit gave me-"in tongues". I prayed for awhile and then my spouse came home-I asked him how his prayer time went and he said, "I kept thinking of your brother Ted" and so I prayed for him."

To make a long story short-at the very moment we were praying-my brother had a gun in his hand and was contemplating suicide. Now, he is saved, teaching Sunday School and is praying about going into the ministry.


And you still never answered my question-if the Bible says, "no one understands" then no one understands so how could it always be a "foreign language"?

In my opinion, tongues very well could be a foreign language-or not, after all there are over 5000 known languages in the world-but hey, it doesn't matter if it is or if it isn't. It's just not important to the equation. They are not for speaking to man--

"He who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man, but to God, indeed NO ONE understands, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries"

16 Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the “Amen” at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? (http://biblebrowser.com/1_corinthians/14-16.htm) 17 For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified. (http://biblebrowser.com/1_corinthians/14-17.htm) 18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; (http://biblebrowser.com/1_corinthians/14-18.htm) 19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (http://biblebrowser.com/1_corinthians/14-19.htm)

Now concerning spiritual gifts bretheren I do not want you to be ingorant.

Makes perfect sense, we don't stand around praying in tongues for others to hear (or read Naphal) unless we are using the gift of tongues, then the interprettion will come forth.

When is the last time a tongue/interpretation was used in your church? The Bible says it's pretty common, "two or at the most three" "each in turn and let one interpret"

BroRog
Jul 4th 2008, 06:52 PM
When is the last time a tongue/interpretation was used in your church?

The gift of tongues is obviously not needed in our church since we all speak English. Do you have a lot of foreigners who attend your church?


He obviously did both.

He did both at the same time, in contrast to those who are merely praying in the spirit. That's his point.

Paul's trying to help the Corinthians to discern the difference between a natural and a supernatural ecstatic utterance. What you described in your example sounds more like Romans 8:26-27, in which the Holy Spirit intercedes for us when words fail us. In this instance, our inarticulate sounds are natural human expressions of urgency. And since the Holy Spirit knows what we need anyway, he intercedes on our behalf.

To me, this appears to be what you described. You were praying in English when words failed to express your deep love an concern for your brother, whom you sensed was in trouble. And since the Holy Spirit knew what needed to be done, he honored your prayer and helped your brother.

I would call this a Romans 8:26-27 experience, not praying in tongues.

You understand I'm not dismissing what happened. I'm just trying to classify it according to Biblical definitions.

threebigrocks
Jul 4th 2008, 09:50 PM
Any of the gifts of the Spirit are given as God sees fit. Just because you've got one of them or if you don't - doesn't mean anything at all. It just means, and in this case the gift of tongues, that God used you to to do His work when it needed to be done. It happens as is dictated by God for it to happen. Some are for a season and some are for a single moments. Some are for a lifetime and some are repeated. It's nothing that makes you more or less. Many times those with one of the gifts will say that it's not all it's cracked up to be.

I don't know how else to say this but to share this again:

1 Corinthians 12



8For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit;
9to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,
10and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues.
11But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.
12For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.
13For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
14For the body is not one member, but many.
15If the foot says, "Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body," it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.
16And if the ear says, "Because I am not an eye, I am not a part of the body," it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.
17If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired.



How are they given? Through the spirit, each given as is deemed necessary. Not everyone gets each and every gift. If the Spirit is not in you, how can He give you a gift? He can't. You must already possess the Spirit within you in order to receive any of the Spirit given gifts.

How can we tell if a person praying in tongues is really and truly speaking in tongues? Through the same Spirit!!!! There is no other way to discern that! We all, aside from the gift of discernment, have the ability to discern these things. Do not look at the person and consult a linguist and hope that in your English speaking congregation there is a visitor today who speaks whatever language the person speaks in. Even if someone does speak in tongues - no gaurantee that it's a language we would recognize anyhow - it's given by the Spirit of a heavenly origin. That's the miracle of interpretation.

Be in constant prayer and open to what God asks of you through the Spirit. We all work together, through the Spirit, unified. To let a gift of God cause such dissention is not serving that purpose.

tango
Jul 4th 2008, 10:12 PM
Tango,

What you are talking about is not the gift of tongues. Rather, it sounds more like Holy Spirit intercession as written in Romans 8.

26 And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for [us] with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to [the will of] God.

These groanings are not to be confused with the supernatural gift of tongues. Our groanings are quite natural. Nothing unusual about them and we all groan from time to time. As Paul says, the spirit knows what we need already, so no words are really necessary.

But if we are going to learn to discern the authentic from the fake, we need to be precise in our definitions. The gift of tongues is the ability to speak another language that you have never learned before. And the purpose is so that a person from another country can hear and understand the Gospel in order to be saved.

I'm inclined to think it's probably both. Certainly it was something prayed for when I didn't know what was required (but figured God knew exactly what was needed), but the fact it came forth like speaking a foreign language leads me to believe it was also related to the gift of tongues.

godsgirl
Jul 4th 2008, 10:15 PM
The gift of tongues is obviously not needed in our church since we all speak English. Do you have a lot of foreigners who attend your church?




If "no one understands" then what would foreigners have to do with anything?

He who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man but to God, indeed no one understands, but in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

It doesn't say, no one except foreigners., in fact-this is why the gift of interpretation is needed when tongues are used as a gift-so that those around can 'say amen to your thanksgiving".

I understand the example I gave was not the "gift of tongues", the gifts are for the church gathered and when the gift of tongues is used, interpretation will come forth so that the church can be edified.

The Bible says that the gifts are given by the Spirit-they are not natural talents like understanding a foreign language.

The natural man does not understand the things of the Spirit nor can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.

Naphal
Jul 5th 2008, 03:46 AM
Ummm, can you tell me why you want me to do that?

Just curious what it would look and sound like.

Naphal
Jul 5th 2008, 03:51 AM
And you still never answered my question-if the Bible says, "no one understands" then no one understands so how could it always be a "foreign language"?

Because the situation being described is if a speaker of a certain language goes and tries to speak with p-eople that don't speak or understand his language. He would only be speaking to God in that scenario but if he can speak their language, or he theirs, or if he has an interpreter then he can be understood.

Naphal
Jul 5th 2008, 03:56 AM
He who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man but to God, indeed no one understands, but in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

It doesn't say, no one except foreigners., in fact-this is why the gift of interpretation is needed when tongues are used as a gift-so that those around can 'say amen to your thanksgiving".

You shouldnt leave out the "unknown" part the translators included. They added that word but only because they understood the proper context as being a human tongue or language that other people didn't understand.

The verse as you have it above makes no sense because you are speaking in a tongue to us in this post but if you took that verse literally then all of your posts and all of our posts aren't directed at each other but to God only.

The only way it makes any sense is if the tongue there is understood to be an "unknown tongue" not unknown to the speaker but to the listeners!

You believe it is unknown to the speaker but that is not the case.

BroRog
Jul 5th 2008, 05:25 AM
If "no one understands" then what would foreigners have to do with anything?

I would think this obvious. My entire church is speaking English. Consequently, when my pastor gives a sermon, and when we sing songs, we speak English and everyone understands what is being said. Therefore the gift of tongues is not needed.

I can imagine, as my uncle said happened to him, a time when someone in the congregation needed to hear the gospel spoken in Spanish. And as my Uncle attempted to give his sermon, Spanish came out of his mouth instead of English. And I suppose, since the Holy Spirit was directing his message to that Spanish speaking man, that man could interpret for the rest of the church if need be. But then, my Uncle knows what he intended to say and could say it again a second time in English.

See how beneficial it can be if done right? The Holy Spirit gives the gift of tongues in order to help the church overcome language barriers.


It doesn't say, no one except foreigners., in fact-this is why the gift of interpretation is needed when tongues are used as a gift-so that those around can 'say amen to your thanksgiving".

A full study of 1Corinthians will reveal that Paul is responding to a letter they sent him. In that letter they asked a bunch of questions and made some statements. As Paul addresses points in their letter, he repeats their sentences and questions.

Paul begins to address a new subject, starting in chapter 12. He begins,

Now concerning spiritual [gifts], brethren, I do not want you to be unaware.

This was one of their topics. They wanted to know more about the spiritual gifts. Apparently the city of Corinth was known for the public practice of paganism. And some of the Christian supernatural gifts seemed to have a familiar ring to them. So he prefaces his remarks this way.

12:1 Now concerning spiritual [gifts], brethren, I do not want you to be unaware. 2 You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however you were led.

Logically, the only way a mute idol can "lead" anyone is through intermediaries who speak for the idol. City officials or regular citizens might come to the god for answers to prayer and questions about the future. The intermediary would speak to the "god" in an "angelic" language, pretending to petition the god. The Priestess would then "interpret" back the answer, i.e. prophesy.

Since the Corinthians were already familiar with spiritual practices that were similar to those of the Holy Spirit, e.g. talking to God through an intermediary using a different language, they had questions for Paul concerning this practice, especially because some false teachers were attempting to lead the Christian church astray, and other, well-meaning Christians were favoring tongues because of its overt spiritual implications.

In addition to this, since tongues was the most overt display of spirituality, many of the Corinthians were seeking to speak in tongues. From his answers in his letter, we can guess at what they thought about the gift of tongues -- that the gift of tongues was the greatest of gifts. But Paul turns this around, making the gift of tongues among the least of the gifts, telling them to "seek the greater gifts". Then, in chapter 13, Paul speaks about a "more excellent way", which is love.

Chapter 14 opens,

For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in [his] spirit he speaks mysteries. But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation.

The Corinthians were of the opinion that the purpose of speaking in tongues was to speak to God. They held this opinion because this was how it was done in their city. In their view, speaking in tongues was for speaking to God. Prophecy was God speaking back to them. That's how it's done in Corinth.

But Paul is trying to correct this view. The true purpose of tongues, in the Christian church, is to speak to foreigners who don't understand the language, not to speak to God. He explains further,

Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?

The answer is, yes they will. And this is exactly what happened during Pentecost. The local people heard other languages and thought the men speaking were drunk, slurred speech being a sign of drunkenness. That's what a foreign language sounds like -- just a bunch of garbled, indistinguishable sounds.

But notice, it was the locals who thought the men were drunk. The foreigners who came to Jerusalem for the Pentecost celebration understood these men perfectly. They knew the men were not drunk because the sounds were understood as language.

Consequently, when the Apostle speaks about "ungifted" men who enter the church, he is not talking about foreigners, but local people. The local unbelievers are going to think them mad and crazy, because the local unbelievers speak the same language as the local believers. Speaking in tongues around local unbelievers is going to sound like crazy babbling.

This brings us back to his earlier statement. When he says no one understands, he doesn't mean, "no one in the entire world understands". He means, "none of you Corinthians understands", because all of them are local people who all share the same language. It might be that many of them are supernaturally speaking a foreign language, but none of them understands, not because the languages are impossible to understand, but because none of them understands it.


I understand the example I gave was not the "gift of tongues", the gifts are for the church gathered and when the gift of tongues is used, interpretation will come forth so that the church can be edified.

The Bible says that the gifts are given by the Spirit-they are not natural talents like understanding a foreign language.


Whether speaking or understanding are natural or supernatural depends on whether you came to speak and understand a language naturally. The gift of speaking supernaturally is a gift only if the church gains benefit from it. And the supernatural ability to understand a foreign language is a gift only if the church benefits from it. But the supernatural gift of interpretation is NEVER used to interpret the supernatural speech of someone with the gift of tongues.

God isn't stu-pid.

godsgirl
Jul 5th 2008, 10:38 AM
You said "the supernatural gift of interpretation is NEVER used to interpret the supernatural speech of someone with the gift of tongues"

Now, that simply isn't true, in fact...the Bible says quite the opposite....


1Co 14:27 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.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
1Co 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
1Co 14:30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.



Interpretation of tongues is the Spirit-given ability to understand and communicate the meaning of an utterance spoken in tongues.
(1 Corinthians 14:13)

According to your post-you believe the gift of interpretation is something different? If so, what-and please use scripture to back it up.


According to Scripture, , the Spirit, and only the Spirit imparts gifts to Spirit-filled believers. “To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.” (1 Cor. 12:8-11).


You cannot rewrite the Bible to make it say what you want it to. All the gifts of the Spirit are supernatural-if your uncle spoke in a language he didn't know-was not that "supernatural"? Healing is supernatural, also a message of wisdom or working of miracles, and so is the gift of interpretation. The gift of tongues does not depend on someone else understanding the foreign language-because the gift of intepretation which is given by the same Holy Spirit is supernatural also.

Let me ask you something, what kind of remark is "God isn't stupid"? Why did you put that comment in your post?

BroRog
Jul 5th 2008, 06:59 PM
According to Scripture, , the Spirit, and only the Spirit imparts gifts to Spirit-filled believers.


I agree with you. There is no question that the Holy Spirit gives the church gifts to help us spread the Gospel, grow the church, and lead us to maturity. I thought we were discussing gift of tongues, attempting to understand what it is. From what I can gather, while you and I are reading the same scriptures, we each have a different mental picture of what the gift is, how it works, and what it does.


You cannot rewrite the Bible to make it say what you want it to. All the gifts of the Spirit are supernatural-if your uncle spoke in a language he didn't know-was not that "supernatural"?

Yes, I believe his ability to speak Spanish at that moment was supernatural. But the ability to understand Spanish was natural for the man who heard my uncle speak. And I used this example to illustrate how I think the gift of tongues is properly practiced.


Healing is supernatural, also a message of wisdom or working of miracles, and so is the gift of interpretation. The gift of tongues does not depend on someone else understanding the foreign language-because the gift of intepretation which is given by the same Holy Spirit is supernatural also.

It's possible that you assume that the phenomena described in Acts 2:4 is significantly different than the one described in 1Cor. 14:2. In Acts 2:4 the people understood the message in their own language; but the phenomena in 1Cor. 14:2 requires a supernatural interpreter. If this is your understanding of tongues, then my Uncle was NOT speaking in tongues as you understand it, since he knew what he intended to say and the Spanish speaker naturally (rather than supernaturally) understood what he said.

I am not one of those who think the phenomena of Acts 2 is different than the phenomena of 1Cor. 12-14. The gift of tongues as displayed in Acts 2 is the same gift of tongues as we find in Paul's letter to the Corinthians. And so, just as the visitors to Jerusalem naturally understood what was being said, the visitors to Corinth would also naturally understand what was being said to them through the supernatural gift of tongues.

In other words, in my view, the gift of tongues is when the Holy Spirit translates what I intend to say into another language. I think in my mind, "God loves you" and out of my mouth comes "Dios le ama" or whatever words Spanish speakers would use to say the same thing. The Holy Spirit is taking over my vocal chords to translate my thoughts into another language.

I take it from your view that you have a completely different model of the gift of tongues. I don't know if this is your view, but some people believe that the Gift of Tongues is different than what I described above. Rather than the Holy Spirit translating my thoughts into another language, the Holy Spirit circumvents my mind altogether in order to use my vocal chords to speak a message in another language. In this view, I would have no idea what I just said. In any case, the message is not what I intended to say, but what the Spirit intends to say through me.

In this instance, I need an interpreter myself, because even I don't know what I said. If perchance I was speaking in Spanish, a Spanish speaker will naturally understand what I said. But if I was speaking in a heavenly language, no one on earth would understand what I said -- not even me.

If this is your view, then my statement that the supernatural interpretation of tongues is NOT used to interpret the words spoken in tongues makes no sense. How else is anyone going to understand what was spoken without a supernatural interpreter? The two gifts work together. Without the gift of interpretation, no one will be able to understand the gift of tongues. Why? Because the Holy Spirit is not speaking a humanly known language.

Of course, this is not my view, because I don't think this is Paul's view. If this were Paul's view, the rest of what he says about tongues wouldn't make any sense.


Let me ask you something, what kind of remark is "God isn't stupid"? Why did you put that comment in your post?

I apologize if I sounded impudent or out of place. That was not my intent. I was being straightforward and direct. Let me explain.

Suppose I invented a code such that anything I say or write was encoded into obscure symbols such that without my special code key, no one could understand me. I teach the code to my wife so that she can also speak and understand my code. But rather than teaching the code to my kids, I speak to them in code requiring my wife to decode everything I say. In order to speak to my son, I talk to him in code. But unless my wife is present, he can't understand a single word I say. I can't or won't talk to my kids in normal English. And they can't understand me unless my wife is present.

Isn't that stupid?

And what kind of gift would it be?

Why is it called the "gift" of tongues if it becomes a hindrance to communication rather than an aid? Why would God give his message to me in a language I can't understand and ask me to seek someone else who also doesn't understand the language hoping that God will give him or her the interpretation? The circuitous nature of this model causes me to dismiss it altogether. God is fully capable of talking directly to me into my mind. If he did, THAT would be a gift. The other thing is just an inefficient, goofy, unnecessary obfuscation.

Naphal
Jul 6th 2008, 12:52 AM
You said "the supernatural gift of interpretation is NEVER used to interpret the supernatural speech of someone with the gift of tongues"

Now, that simply isn't true, in fact...the Bible says quite the opposite....


1Co 14:27 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.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
1Co 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
1Co 14:30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.



Interpretation of tongues is the Spirit-given ability to understand and communicate the meaning of an utterance spoken in tongues.
(1 Corinthians 14:13)

This isn't an example of the Holy tongues. This is simply talking about foreign languages and the need to interpret them when speaking to a crowd that doesn't know the language.


1Co 14:27 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.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

For example, lets say there are 5 English speaking missionaries visiting a new church in Mexico and no one there speaks English and they don't speak Spanish. They should only speak to the members if they have an interpreter and only three should speak at the most because it would be too confusing for a translator to try to keep up. Nothing magical or mystical here. It's just sound advice about foreign languages.

godsgirl
Jul 6th 2008, 11:45 AM
This isn't an example of the Holy tongues. This is simply talking about foreign languages and the need to interpret them when speaking to a crowd that doesn't know the language.


1Co 14:27 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.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

For example, lets say there are 5 English speaking missionaries visiting a new church in Mexico and no one there speaks English and they don't speak Spanish. They should only speak to the members if they have an interpreter and only three should speak at the most because it would be too confusing for a translator to try to keep up. Nothing magical or mystical here. It's just sound advice about foreign languages.




I disagree-the Bible says, "no one understands" I think that's what it means.-when one is used to give a message in tongues-one does not merely speak a foreign language the thoughts in his head.

Speaking in tongues is a Spirit given urging to speak forth the Words the Holy Spirit gives you. 9 times out of 10 no one in the congregation understands the langauge, but then the Holy Spirit gives another the, also supernatural gift of interpretation. Both utterences in tongues and the gift of interpretation, in fact, all the gifts of the Spirit are supernatural. This is why the Bible calls them "spiritual gifts". They are not natural talents. There are many gifts listed in the Word-yet the Bible only uses the term "spiritual gifts" for those that cannot be natural talents in any way.

Naphal
Jul 6th 2008, 08:32 PM
I disagree-the Bible says, "no one understands" I think that's what it means.-


Do you understand German? If I spoke it to you would you understand it? If yes, then substitute a dif language you don't know.

Remember it says there can be an interpreter which means in the least that the speaker of that language and the interpreter understand what's being said. It's the audience that doesn't in that passage.





Speaking in tongues is a Spirit given urging to speak forth the Words the Holy Spirit gives you.



This is true but never is that language something that needs to be interpreted. You are confusing when the bible talks about foreign languages with when it has spoken of the Holy tongue. It's two completely different issues but both are described using the older English word "tongue" and it's that word which causes this confusion.




9 times out of 10 no one in the congregation understands the langauge, but then the Holy Spirit gives another the, also supernatural gift of interpretation.

If no one understands it then it's not the Holy tongues from the Holy spirit. It's either a human language no one knows, or it's just babble. The Holy tongues is designed to always be understood. That's the one and only way to recognize it.

threebigrocks
Jul 7th 2008, 04:15 AM
If no one understands it then it's not the Holy tongues from the Holy spirit. It's either a human language no one knows, or it's just babble. The Holy tongues is designed to always be understood. That's the one and only way to recognize it.

Indeed, how can there be someone to interpret if they can't understand it? That is the order of things, that if it's said among others and not in private prayer to the Lord, there must be someone to interpret. Tongues are given and meaning revealed by God through the Spirit. Just as you do not know where God may lead you tomorrow, neither can we assume that we will know in our fleshy minds what the words that come through tongues by the Spirit will be or mean.

godsgirl
Jul 7th 2008, 10:43 AM
The Bible doesn't say, "no one understands, EXCEPT those who speak German-it simply says "no one".

"he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man, but to God" it simply doesn't matter if there is one who actually "translates" the language-The Spirit gives the "interpretation".

If you think that it's perfectly possible for the Holy Spirit to have you speak in a language you do not know or have not learned-then why would it be impossible for the Holy Spirit to give another the meaning of what was said?

BroRog
Jul 7th 2008, 02:45 PM
The Bible doesn't say, "no one understands, EXCEPT those who speak German-it simply says "no one".

"he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man, but to God" it simply doesn't matter if there is one who actually "translates" the language-The Spirit gives the "interpretation".

If you think that it's perfectly possible for the Holy Spirit to have you speak in a language you do not know or have not learned-then why would it be impossible for the Holy Spirit to give another the meaning of what was said?

If no one understands, then why did Paul say the one speaking in tongues could interpret?

Whispering Grace
Jul 7th 2008, 02:53 PM
If no one understands, then why did Paul say the one speaking in tongues could interpret?

Why did Paul tell us to pray that we may interpret if we could already interpret?

If God can give the tongue, He can give the interpretation.

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 02:59 PM
Jesus, who is God, clearly and precisely told us how to pray:

Mat 6:7 "And when you pray, don't babble on and on like the pagans, who think God will hear them better if they talk a lot.
Mat 6:8 Don't be like them, because your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Mat 6:9 You, therefore, pray like this: 'Our Father in heaven! May your Name be kept holy.
Mat 6:10 May your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as in heaven.
Mat 6:11 Give us the food we need today.
Mat 6:12 Forgive us what we have done wrong, as we too have forgiven those who have wronged us.
Mat 6:13 And do not lead us into hard testing, but keep us safe from the Evil One. [The latter half of verse 13 is not found in the oldest manuscripts.] For kingship, power and glory are yours forever. Amen.'

This is how GOD told us to pray. If there is any confusion over what Paul says, defer to what GOD says!

godsgirl
Jul 7th 2008, 03:46 PM
Jesus, who is God, clearly and precisely told us how to pray:

Mat 6:7 "And when you pray, don't babble on and on like the pagans, who think God will hear them better if they talk a lot.
Mat 6:8 Don't be like them, because your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Mat 6:9 You, therefore, pray like this: 'Our Father in heaven! May your Name be kept holy.
Mat 6:10 May your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as in heaven.
Mat 6:11 Give us the food we need today.
Mat 6:12 Forgive us what we have done wrong, as we too have forgiven those who have wronged us.
Mat 6:13 And do not lead us into hard testing, but keep us safe from the Evil One. [The latter half of verse 13 is not found in the oldest manuscripts.] For kingship, power and glory are yours forever. Amen.'

This is how GOD told us to pray. If there is any confusion over what Paul says, defer to what GOD says!


What makes you judge that praying in tongues is "babbling on and on like the pagans"---Paul himself said, "I thank God I pray in tongues more than all of you"---Jesus trusted him to write most of the NT, in fact, all the writers of the NT spoke in tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 04:20 PM
Sorry, I'm not the judge of anything. All I know is what God says, and all I try to do is speak His truth in the correct context. What makes you think Paul didn't pray in all the languages he knew? I pray in Hebrew all the time, sometimes in Greek, sometimes in English.

Again, how did GOD show us to pray? Did Jesus mumble? Who is our Rabbi, our High Preist? Who are we disciples of? Jesus or Paul?

It is a historical fact that pagans envoked this type of utterance to thier idols. Paul had two issues to deal with - legalistic Jews and legalistic Pagans. Both had detrimental influence on the congregations in His venue.

Additionally ALL the spiritual gifts Paul spoke to were for the edification of the BODY, not a self-centered edification, and he says so.

Check out scripture. Even the angels observed spoke in Hebrew only.

godsgirl
Jul 7th 2008, 04:35 PM
I know Paul spoke in languages he didn't understand because he said so..

"If I pray in a tongue my spirit prays but my understanding is unfruitful, so what shall I do? I WILL PRAY WITH MY MIND and I WILL PRAY WITH MY SPIRIT, I WILL SING WITH MY SPIRIT AND I WILL SING WITH MY UNDERSTANDING ALSO"

As far as your unkind comments, concerning "Jesus mumbling' and insinuating that we are like "pagans talking to idols"-I stand before Jesus-He is my source and strength-He is the One who baptises believers in the Spirit. I do not have to worry about receiving a stone or a snake when I have His Word on it. pagans and such meet together also-that doesn't mean that we shouldn't-conparing them to children of the Most High God is not only an unkind thing to say it is quite unbiblical.

Yes, the spiritual gifts are for the edification of the body-all of us. He didn't use the words "self centered" though-you did. He said 'he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself" and "I want you all to speak in tongues"

As far as 'what God said" I take the Words of the scripture to heart.--all of them. When the pharisees stood before Jesus comparing him to satan, insinuating that he got His power there-He told them to be careful not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit-you could take a lesson.

Athanasius
Jul 7th 2008, 04:36 PM
The question for me that immediately comes up is this: what does the word 'babble' mean? Because I absolutely disagree with keck; but I also don't believe all speak in tongues (just to get that out of the way).

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 04:52 PM
Babble = ecstatic utterance.

It matters not whether we disagree with each other. What matters is that we agree with Eloheim.
The Greek word for Tongue is found 50 times in the Apostalic Writings, 25 of which refer to "speaking in Tongues". The other 25 related to the physical organ. Of the 25 instances germane to this issue of ecstatic utterance (babble) 20 are in 1 Cor, 15 in chapter 14. The remaining 5 are in Mark and Acts.

Let's go over these, one by one, in the proper context instead of 'disagreeing with each other'. let's discover that God means exactly what He stated in Matthew 6, and in ALL of God's instruction for prayer in the TeNaKh.

Blessed is the Holy One, Sar Shalom.

Athanasius
Jul 7th 2008, 05:09 PM
Babble = ecstatic utterance.

Before we get to the rest; according to whom?

threebigrocks
Jul 7th 2008, 05:12 PM
If I wanted to, I could conciously speak what seemed like tongues right now, but it would just simply be babble. It came frome me, not the Spirit. Any believer with the Spirit in them would know the difference for sure in themselves and as discernment grows when another person was just babbling.

I've heard people say they brought down or prompted the gift of tongues on themselves by just following the prompting of another in what is essentially babble. Also know those who did honestly speak in tongues on one occation by the Spirit, and continue to speak in tongues brought on by themselves as though having it be a one time thing is a black mark. That is plain vanity. I also know people who speak as the Spirit gives utterance, nothing more and nothing less.

The gift is active today, and as with spiritual gifts they are given as God deems necessary. We need to quit forcing the validity or invalidity of what is Spiritual. We now only see through a glass dimly. Don't expect to grasp that which this side of heaven may very well be difficult for our finite minds to grasp.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 05:21 PM
If I wanted to, I could conciously speak what seemed like tongues right now, but it would just simply be babble. It came frome me, not the Spirit. Any believer with the Spirit in them would know the difference for sure in themselves and as discernment grows when another person was just babbling.

I've heard people say they brought down or prompted the gift of tongues on themselves by just following the prompting of another in what is essentially babble. Also know those who did honestly speak in tongues on one occation by the Spirit, and continue to speak in tongues brought on by themselves as though having it be a one time thing is a black mark. That is plain vanity. I also know people who speak as the Spirit gives utterance, nothing more and nothing less.

The gift is active today, and as with spiritual gifts they are given as God deems necessary. We need to quit forcing the validity or invalidity of what is Spiritual. We now only see through a glass dimly. Don't expect to grasp that which this side of heaven may very well be difficult for our finite minds to grasp.

One thing I would like to point out about the phrase "as the Spirit gave them utterance" . . .

Some people seem to be under the assumption that this phrase means that the Spirit physically took control of a person and forced them to speak in some other language, and this person had no control over their actions. I do not believe this to be the case at all. The gift of tongues operates just as any other gift of the Spirit. It operates through faith, and we have to willfully participate and obey the Holy Spirit. If the Spirit speaks to you and tells you to lay your hands on someone and speak healing over them, the Spirit doesn't physically take control over your hands and force you to do so. You have to act on faith in what you believe the Spirit has said and move your own hands. The same thing applies with tongues.

threebigrocks
Jul 7th 2008, 05:24 PM
One thing I would like to point out about the phrase "as the Spirit gave them utterance" . . .

Some people seem to be under the assumption that this phrase means that the Spirit physically took control of a person and forced them to speak in some other language, and this person had no control over their actions. I do not believe this to be the case at all. The gift of tongues operates just as any other gift of the Spirit. It operates through faith, and we have to willfully participate and obey the Holy Spirit. If the Spirit speaks to you and tells you to lay your hands on someone and speak healing over them, the Spirit doesn't physically take control over your hands and force you to do so. You have to act on faith in what you believe the Spirit has said and move your own hands. The same thing applies with tongues.

It is a matter of submission, and dying to the flesh. Many don't heed the Spirit because they themselves are in their own way of hearing Him to the point of obedience.

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 05:53 PM
God spells out obedience in plain and easy to understand terms. If this is a matter of obedience, then ONLY GOD can command it. Nowhere in all of scripture can I find God commanding His children to speak or pray in such ways. In fact, God commands quite the opposite.

I can't find in scriptures where vague emotional spasms of incomphrehensible grunts and mumblings is commanded by God. God gives commands and instructions, not Paul; he is only a rabbi, a teacher.

When in doubt, ask "What does God say?" Look to the Word of God if His prophets and teachers can't be properly understood in context.

I'm still waiting to see scripture supporting ecstatic utterances, and scripture that shows spiritual gifts are given for self centered edification.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 06:01 PM
I'm still waiting to see scripture supporting ecstatic utterances.

Keep searching . . .

Nothing anyone shows you here is going to change your view, so really . . . what's the point of continuing?

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 06:06 PM
Before we get to the rest; according to whom?

God tells us how to pray. So my answer is 'according to the Word of God.'

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 06:07 PM
God tells us how to pray. So my answer is 'according to the Word of God.'

Actually, God tells us that sometimes we know not what to pray.

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 06:08 PM
I think I said "how to pray", not "what to pray". Pull out the scripture. We'll put it into context to it's true meaning.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 06:13 PM
Pull out the scripture. We'll put it into context to it's true meaning.

Okay . . . go for it.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 06:14 PM
I think I said "how to pray", not "what to pray". Pull out the scripture. We'll put it into context to it's true meaning.

So, God tells us how to pray, but sometimes we don't know what to pray for. So then how could the way you say God tells us to pray apply if we don't know what to pray for?

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 06:16 PM
Friend, you referred to scripture, but did not provide it. The burden of proof is upon you.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 06:20 PM
Friend, you referred to scripture, but did not provide it. The burden of proof is upon you.

Do you not know what Scripture I referred to? If you do, why are you asking me to provide something you already know about? I just view your approach here to be quite silly, and there is really no need in continuing such a conversation with you. You are decided in what you believe, so we would not be reasoning together. You would simply be trying to prove others wrong. I have no interest is such foolishness. Your comments here are not of love and trying to dig in God's truth for revelation. According to you, you already know everything there is to know on this topic . . . so where is such a discussion to go?

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 06:41 PM
Do you not know what Scripture I referred to? If you do, why are you asking me to provide something you already know about? I just view your approach here to be quite silly, and there is really no need in continuing such a conversation with you. You are decided in what you believe, so we would not be reasoning together. You would simply be trying to prove others wrong. I have no interest is such foolishness. Your comments here are not of love and trying to dig in God's truth for revelation. According to you, you already know everything there is to know on this topic . . . so where is such a discussion to go?

If you can't find the scripture you're referring to, just say so. It's your argument, not mine. I have provided all the scripture to back up what I said on this thread, in fact I answered you with scripture on page 5 of this thread and expanded on page 6 of this thread, referrencing scripture.

I have no desire to prove others wrong, only to see what God says. This isn't an ego contest for me, it's a journey to find the Character and Nature that our Creator decided to reveal to us.

In my life, I've found it very difficult to abandon a false teaching, I have had many to walk away from and towards God's truth. There is no substitute for the freedom attained in the revealation of God's truth. If we sincerely open our hearts and are willing to surrender our ways unto God, He will reveal and bless us with truth. My friend, I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong; it's for the Holy Spirit to teach you what's profitable and what's unprofitable in worship to God.

Use this forum to stimulate you're prayer life and thought. Sincerely ask God for the truth, study His Word, and He will reveal it to you.

May God bless you richly and in abundance.

BroRog
Jul 7th 2008, 06:51 PM
Why did Paul tell us to pray that we may interpret if we could already interpret?

He was being sarcastic.

Whispering Grace
Jul 7th 2008, 06:54 PM
He was being sarcastic.

Who was being sarcastic?

BroRog
Jul 7th 2008, 07:01 PM
Who was being sarcastic?

Paul was. He had already said that a person speaking in tongues could give the interpretation himself. After saying that, he asks the Corinthians that as long as they are praying in tongues, the ought to pray that they might interpret. That's called sarcasm.

VerticalReality
Jul 7th 2008, 07:06 PM
If you can't find the scripture you're referring to, just say so.

Why do you assume I can't find it? I know it quite well. I'm asking why you are requesting that I post a Scripture that you are already aware of. Are you trying to play dumb here as if you are not aware of what Scripture I was referring to?


It's your argument, not mine. I have provided all the scripture to back up what I said on this thread, in fact I answered you with scripture on page 5 of this thread and expanded on page 6 of this thread, referrencing scripture.

The only thing you have provided is your interpretation of Scripture. Others have supplied their interpretation, which is quite valid. If you do not accept or consider their view, why in the world would I want to rehash it over and over again to you here?


I have no desire to prove others wrong, only to see what God says. This isn't an ego contest for me, it's a journey to find the Character and Nature that our Creator decided to reveal to us.

The tone of your posts reveal differently.


If we sincerely open our hearts and are willing to surrender our ways unto God, He will reveal and bless us with truth.

Sure. What makes you think those who speak in tongues have not done that, and it is by God's revelation that they now believe in this gift?

Naphal
Jul 7th 2008, 07:07 PM
The Bible doesn't say, "no one understands, EXCEPT those who speak German-it simply says "no one".

The interpreter understands or else they couldn't interpret it! No one means no one being spoken to. If it was literal then even God wouldn't understand!



"he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man, but to God" it simply doesn't matter if there is one who actually "translates" the language-The Spirit gives the "interpretation".

It matters if you want the listeners to understand what you are trying to say. And if you don't, then you shouldn't even speak in a church.




If you think that it's perfectly possible for the Holy Spirit to have you speak in a language you do not know or have not learned-then why would it be impossible for the Holy Spirit to give another the meaning of what was said?

It's not but the miracle of the Holy tongues from the Holy Spirit is that anyone can understand it. If the "tongue" spoken needs to be interpreted then it's not the Holy tongues.

Athanasius
Jul 7th 2008, 07:23 PM
God tells us how to pray. So my answer is 'according to the Word of God.'

You misunderstand me. According to whom is "Babble = ecstatic utterance". Your definition? A dictionaries definition? The Bibles definition?

timmyb
Jul 7th 2008, 08:51 PM
If you are praying in the Spirit (tongues) it does not matter who interprets... you don't need one because you aren't speaking or praying for their benefit. but you don't need to be babbling so loud that you are disturbing the spiritual atmosphere that other person is enjoying... the Holy Spirit is a perfect gentleman and knows how to properly behave in every situation... he is not rude nor prideful...

if there is a time to war in the Spirit and intercede according to the spirit's intercession... then it will be a time for that... in the prayer closet, is your own thing...

but if you are prophesying, there HAS to be an interpreter... unless you just babbled in such a way that would actually confuse the order of the service...

but if you are speaking in a language that you have never spoken before, that's the tongues that is definitely a sign for the unbeliever... because it is meant for the unbeliever to hear... . he has to hear something in the manner that will make him fall on his face and worship God

keck553
Jul 7th 2008, 10:51 PM
You misunderstand me. According to whom is "Babble = ecstatic utterance". Your definition? A dictionaries definition? The Bibles definition?

Most everyone, including Yeshua and Paul.

Of Yeshua, He told us how to pray. He used clear and concise language. He did not say to work yourself up in an emotional frenzy and speak ecstatic utterances. I didn't say that, God did. If you disagree with how God instructed you how to pray, take it up with Him, not me.

Of Paul, He shows us in Galations 5:22-23 that the furit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and self-control". If this fruit (I point to self-control) isn't expressed in these ways, they are functioning in the flesh. Pretty simple process really. When the believer walks in the Spirit, the fruit of the Spirit is produced.

It can't be clearer than in scripture about what the gift of 'tongues' is. In Acts 2:1, on the day of Pentacost, 120 diciples were gathered waiting for the promised Holy Spirit. It goes on to say they began to speak in many other languages under the Holy Spirit.

The Greek word for Tongues is "Glossa" - the SAME word as used for "Language". It becomes clearer as scripture is continued in verse 5 "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because every man heard them speak in his own glossa - Language." There is no question about the fact that the tongues spoke of here were distinct languages spoken and understood by men of different nations. It says so.

Verse 7 goes on to say they 'were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, behold, are not all these who speak Galileans?". Galileans in the 1st century were considered hicks, the trailor trash of Judea. They weren't at all connected with the refined, educated of Jerusalem. So the people must have thought "how could these hicks be linguists? They don't even have schools out there." Consequently, they were amazed.

And what languages did they speak? The answeres are listed in verses 9-11. Nowhere is ecstatic speech referred to. They are referred to as bonifide human languages.

In fact the Greek "Glossa" primary meaning is "human language" as used by Paul. The word glossa comes from glossolalia and means "tongue". If you refer to the septuagint, you'll find it means human language in all TeNaKh references in all but two cases - Isaiah 29:24 and Isaiah 32:4, where it merely referes to stammering, or stuttering, not ecstatic language or pagan babble. So the NORMAL usage of 'glossa' in all Scripture is bonifide, human language.

Additionally, the Greek "dialektos" (we get "dialect" from it) is used in Acts 2:6 and Acts 2:8, where it says some heard it in even in their own dialect! The disciples were being heard not only in foreign languages, but also in regional dialect. Obviously this reference isn't to babble.

later in Acts 10-44-46, "While Kefa (Peter) yt spoke these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them who heard the word. And they of the circumcision who beleived were astonished, as many as came with Kefa, because on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. For they heard them speak with tongues (languages)..." Same word - glossa. Nothing's changed.

Same in Acts 19:6 - the same Greek word "glossa" identified in Acts 2 as "languages". Same term, same meaning.

Hermeneuo (interpretation) can not be referring to the interpretation of babble or ecstatic utterances because babble is not a language by any biblical standard. The Greek word here referres to taking a message in one known language and interpreting it to another known language. You can't translate babble.

If you look for the word "unknown" seen in the King James seen in 1 Cor 14 in the original manuscript, you will not find it. The word was added by the King James translators.

1 Cor 14:21 indicates tongues were a foreign language given as a sign to unbeleiving Israel. Refer to Isaiah 28:11-12. "In Torah, 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."

Paul referes to this Prophecy by Isaiah, and the foreign language was Assyrian, spoken by Assyrians. The prophecy spoke to a known language - Assyrian. Paul then goes on to say (22) that tongues are for a sign to unbeleiving Israel. Since the tongues prophecied by Isaiah was fulfilled, the tongues in 1Cor14 must be the same, or Paul is lying.

In chapter 14 verses 7 and 8, Paul says "And even things without life, whether flute of harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who shapp prepare himself to the battle?" This speaks of structure. No army of soldiers could go to battle without a structured and organized trumpet blow.

The truth is the Corinthians allowed this ecstatic pagan babble into their chuch and it was counterfeiting the true gift of languages. If you read on, you'll find this ecstasy in this babbling was turning their worship into an orgy (14:23 - If therefore, the whole church be come together in one place, and all speak with tongues (languages), and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say you are mad?). What Paul was saying that if all this emotional dross and hysteria that was going on, with everyone doing their own thing, then they're going to have problems, because unbelieving people would consider them nuts. Because, the amazement element for unbelieving Jews depended upon the fact that real languages were spoken and miraculously translated. that would be the sign from God.

So the effectiveness of the sing of the gift of languages depended on the difference from pagan babble that they used in pagan worship at Corinth and legitimate languages. Jews were well aware of pagan worship and the babble that accompanyed it. That would do nothing to impress them. However, a genuine gift of translating known languages by the uneducated is truely a miricle.

If an unbelieving Jew heard babble, he'd simply chock it up to the known pagan hysteria they were familiar with.

Athanasius
Jul 8th 2008, 12:55 AM
Most everyone, including Yeshua and Paul.

Of Yeshua, He told us how to pray. He used clear and concise language. He did not say to work yourself up in an emotional frenzy and speak ecstatic utterances. I didn't say that, God did. If you disagree with how God instructed you how to pray, take it up with Him, not me.

Of Paul, He shows us in Galations 5:22-23 that the furit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and self-control". If this fruit (I point to self-control) isn't expressed in these ways, they are functioning in the flesh. Pretty simple process really. When the believer walks in the Spirit, the fruit of the Spirit is produced.

It can't be clearer than in scripture about what the gift of 'tongues' is. In Acts 2:1, on the day of Pentacost, 120 diciples were gathered waiting for the promised Holy Spirit. It goes on to say they began to speak in many other languages under the Holy Spirit.

The Greek word for Tongues is "Glossa" - the SAME word as used for "Language". It becomes clearer as scripture is continued in verse 5 "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because every man heard them speak in his own glossa - Language." There is no question about the fact that the tongues spoke of here were distinct languages spoken and understood by men of different nations. It says so.

Verse 7 goes on to say they 'were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, behold, are not all these who speak Galileans?". Galileans in the 1st century were considered hicks, the trailor trash of Judea. They weren't at all connected with the refined, educated of Jerusalem. So the people must have thought "how could these hicks be linguists? They don't even have schools out there." Consequently, they were amazed.

And what languages did they speak? The answeres are listed in verses 9-11. Nowhere is ecstatic speech referred to. They are referred to as bonifide human languages.

In fact the Greek "Glossa" primary meaning is "human language" as used by Paul. The word glossa comes from glossolalia and means "tongue". If you refer to the septuagint, you'll find it means human language in all TeNaKh references in all but two cases - Isaiah 29:24 and Isaiah 32:4, where it merely referes to stammering, or stuttering, not ecstatic language or pagan babble. So the NORMAL usage of 'glossa' in all Scripture is bonifide, human language.

Additionally, the Greek "dialektos" (we get "dialect" from it) is used in Acts 2:6 and Acts 2:8, where it says some heard it in even in their own dialect! The disciples were being heard not only in foreign languages, but also in regional dialect. Obviously this reference isn't to babble.

later in Acts 10-44-46, "While Kefa (Peter) yt spoke these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them who heard the word. And they of the circumcision who beleived were astonished, as many as came with Kefa, because on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. For they heard them speak with tongues (languages)..." Same word - glossa. Nothing's changed.

Same in Acts 19:6 - the same Greek word "glossa" identified in Acts 2 as "languages". Same term, same meaning.

Hermeneuo (interpretation) can not be referring to the interpretation of babble or ecstatic utterances because babble is not a language by any biblical standard. The Greek word here referres to taking a message in one known language and interpreting it to another known language. You can't translate babble.

If you look for the word "unknown" seen in the King James seen in 1 Cor 14 in the original manuscript, you will not find it. The word was added by the King James translators.

1 Cor 14:21 indicates tongues were a foreign language given as a sign to unbeleiving Israel. Refer to Isaiah 28:11-12. "In Torah, 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."

Paul referes to this Prophecy by Isaiah, and the foreign language was Assyrian, spoken by Assyrians. The prophecy spoke to a known language - Assyrian. Paul then goes on to say (22) that tongues are for a sign to unbeleiving Israel. Since the tongues prophecied by Isaiah was fulfilled, the tongues in 1Cor14 must be the same, or Paul is lying.

In chapter 14 verses 7 and 8, Paul says "And even things without life, whether flute of harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who shapp prepare himself to the battle?" This speaks of structure. No army of soldiers could go to battle without a structured and organized trumpet blow.

The truth is the Corinthians allowed this ecstatic pagan babble into their chuch and it was counterfeiting the true gift of languages. If you read on, you'll find this ecstasy in this babbling was turning their worship into an orgy (14:23 - If therefore, the whole church be come together in one place, and all speak with tongues (languages), and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say you are mad?). What Paul was saying that if all this emotional dross and hysteria that was going on, with everyone doing their own thing, then they're going to have problems, because unbelieving people would consider them nuts. Because, the amazement element for unbelieving Jews depended upon the fact that real languages were spoken and miraculously translated. that would be the sign from God.

So the effectiveness of the sing of the gift of languages depended on the difference from pagan babble that they used in pagan worship at Corinth and legitimate languages. Jews were well aware of pagan worship and the babble that accompanyed it. That would do nothing to impress them. However, a genuine gift of translating known languages by the uneducated is truely a miricle.

If an unbelieving Jew heard babble, he'd simply chock it up to the known pagan hysteria they were familiar with.

Thanks for the info (seriously), but I'm not defending babbling... By the way, what does angelic language (1 Cor. 13:1) sound like? I ask the question because right now I'm thinking Romans and Barbarians.

kdub
Jul 8th 2008, 02:13 AM
I understand there are people divided on this topic. To both sides involved I have a question.

Should tongues (by either sides definition) be used in a church service by many members at the same time with no interpretation coming after?

godsgirl
Jul 8th 2008, 02:23 AM
Personally, no kdub, I don't believe so. Tongues as one of the gifts of the Spirit-are "two or at the most three, each in turn and let one interpret"
When the Lord moves upon one to give a message in tongues it is loud enough for the church to hear-and then the body needs to be quiet and wait upon the Lord for the interpretation to come forth.

Praying in tongues is a good thing-but it is for God's ears-and "indeed you give thanks well, but the other is not edified"

If you stand next to me in church you might overhear me praying in tongues-and I feel that isn't any different than you overhearing me pray in English-I'm not talking to you and it shouldn't "offend" you in any way, but if the whole church does it loudly at once it just causes confusion and isn't edifying to unbelievers.

If the Holy Spirit moves upon me to give a message in tongues-you will not need to be standing next to me-you will know that I am speaking for the church to hear., and then I will be praying for the interpretation to come forth.

Whispering Grace
Jul 8th 2008, 02:26 AM
Paul was. He had already said that a person speaking in tongues could give the interpretation himself. After saying that, he asks the Corinthians that as long as they are praying in tongues, the ought to pray that they might interpret. That's called sarcasm.

Huh...........?

godsgirl
Jul 8th 2008, 02:32 AM
If no one understands, then why did Paul say the one speaking in tongues could interpret?


Because just like the speaking forth a message in tongues is given "as the Spirit wills", so is the "interpretation" given the same way. Both are supernatural. One simply doesn't "understand" the words being spoken, one is given the meaning by the Spirit of the Lord. Sometimes He gives the meaning to the one speaking the tongue, sometimes to another. Either way, the interpretation doesn't come forth until after the message is given.

BroRog
Jul 8th 2008, 02:43 AM
Huh...........?

Are you surprised? You don't think there is sarcasm in the word of God?

BroRog
Jul 8th 2008, 03:04 AM
Because just like the speaking forth a message in tongues is given "as the Spirit wills", so is the "interpretation" given the same way. Both are supernatural. One simply doesn't "understand" the words being spoken, one is given the meaning by the Spirit of the Lord. Sometimes He gives the meaning to the one speaking the tongue, sometimes to another. Either way, the interpretation doesn't come forth until after the message is given. Emphasis mine

What you said doesn't fit with what Paul said. Paul said the person speaking in tongues can interpret the tongues himself. He says this two verses later in verse 4.

and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying.

If he doesn't understand, he can't interpret; and if he can't interpret, then Paul is raising a false expectation that he can. Notice what Paul doesn't say. He doesn't say, "greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless a supernatural interpretation comes forth." Paul raises our expectation that at least some men are able to interpret the tongues themselves. Therefore, if some men are able to interpret the tongues themselves, then it isn't true that no one understands.

Now, if you simply take the phrase "no one understands" out of it's context, you have Paul contradicting himself within two verses. But if we choose not to accept that Paul will contradict himself, as Bible students, we need to pay attention to these moments and try to resolve them in a way that makes sense out of the passage according to what Paul intends to say.

godsgirl
Jul 8th 2008, 10:21 AM
It's simple-for example-when I speak a message in tongues-I do not "understand" what is being said.,, however, the same Holy Spirit who prompted me to speak out in a tongue is the same Holy Spirit who will give the "interpretation" to either me or another standing by. The interpretation comes the same way the message does. We speak as we are prompted by the Holy Spirit. We do not "understand" in the way one would understand a sentence in English-we receive the meaning from the Holy Spirit. Interpretation of tongues is bringing forth the meaning to the congregation, it isn't a, "ok I understood that language" kind of thing at all. The gift of tongues works in conjunction with the gift of interpretation. However, they are both supernatural.

1. Speaking in tongues – Edifies the individual – 1Corinth 14:4
2. Speaking in tongues – Is Prayer in the Spirit – 1Corinth 14:14
3. Prayer in the Spirit – bulds us up in our “Most Holy Faith & edifies us Jude 1:20
4. In the Public Worship only 2 or 3 people will speak in tongues. – 1Corinth 14:27
5. Interpretation is a "must" for publc worship-so that the church can be edified.
6. Speaking in tongues is a “sign” to Unbelievers. 1Corinth 14:22

BroRog
Jul 8th 2008, 02:43 PM
It's simple-for example-when I speak a message in tongues-I do not "understand" what is being said.,, however, the same Holy Spirit who prompted me to speak out in a tongue is the same Holy Spirit who will give the "interpretation" to either me or another standing by. The interpretation comes the same way the message does. We speak as we are prompted by the Holy Spirit. We do not "understand" in the way one would understand a sentence in English-we receive the meaning from the Holy Spirit. Interpretation of tongues is bringing forth the meaning to the congregation, it isn't a, "ok I understood that language" kind of thing at all. The gift of tongues works in conjunction with the gift of interpretation. However, they are both supernatural.

1. Speaking in tongues – Edifies the individual – 1Corinth 14:4
2. Speaking in tongues – Is Prayer in the Spirit – 1Corinth 14:14
3. Prayer in the Spirit – bulds us up in our “Most Holy Faith & edifies us Jude 1:20
4. In the Public Worship only 2 or 3 people will speak in tongues. – 1Corinth 14:27
5. Interpretation is a "must" for publc worship-so that the church can be edified.
6. Speaking in tongues is a “sign” to Unbelievers. 1Corinth 14:22

I'm going to challenge you on this because I've heard this so many times.

You said:

"when I speak a message in tongues-I do not "understand" what is being said."

Question: how do you know you spoke in tongues? If you don't know what you said, you have no basis to make that claim.

You said:

"however, the same Holy Spirit who prompted me to speak out in a tongue is the same Holy Spirit who will give the "interpretation" to either me or another standing by."

Question: since no one understands what you said, how do you know it was the Holy Spirit who gave the interpretation?

Answer: You don't. You have no idea what is going on. How does anyone know whether you and your friends are not playing some kind of fun game? That's what people say. It's a fantasy role-playing game and you have no way to know.

ProjectPeter
Jul 8th 2008, 03:08 PM
I'm going to challenge you on this because I've heard this so many times.

You said:

"when I speak a message in tongues-I do not "understand" what is being said."

Question: how do you know you spoke in tongues? If you don't know what you said, you have no basis to make that claim.

You said:

"however, the same Holy Spirit who prompted me to speak out in a tongue is the same Holy Spirit who will give the "interpretation" to either me or another standing by."

Question: since no one understands what you said, how do you know it was the Holy Spirit who gave the interpretation?

Answer: You don't. You have no idea what is going on. How does anyone know whether you and your friends are not playing some kind of fun game? That's what people say. It's a fantasy role-playing game and you have no way to know.Um... perhaps you might respond to the Scripture? Is it correct and if so... challenge the Scripture.

keck553
Jul 8th 2008, 03:50 PM
Thanks for the info (seriously), but I'm not defending babbling... By the way, what does angelic language (1 Cor. 13:1) sound like? I ask the question because right now I'm thinking Romans and Barbarians.

All one has to do is refer to God's Word in the TeNaKh. Every angel. sarafim or other heavenly being, whether they spoke to men or each other, or praised God, did so in Hebrew.

Our only reliable reference to angelic communication is in God's Word.. To speculate angelic talk is anything else is guessing and guessing usually involves our way, not God's Way, Simply put, the Word of God does not support angelic talk as anything other than Hebrew. Paul knew that; he was a very well educated Jew and like all God fearing Jews of the time, he had at least Torah committed to memory, and probably most of the writings of the prophets.

If you study the ancient Hebrew language, you'll find all of it points directly to God. There is a Messianic message even in the first letter of Genesis 1:1. If any tongue is spoken in Heaven, it's Hebrew.

By the way, thanking God is rather straightforward:

"Thank you God"

To submit that acstatic utterances are more pleasing to God tha a simple heartfelt "Thank you God" is invoking legalism and works.

VerticalReality
Jul 8th 2008, 04:13 PM
All one has to do is refer to God's Word in the TeNaKh. Every angel. sarafim or other heavenly being, whether they spoke to men or each other, or praised God, did so in Hebrew.

Our only reliable reference to angelic communication is in God's Word.. To speculate angelic talk is anything else is guessing and guessing usually involves our way, not God's Way, Simply put, the Word of God does not support angelic talk as anything other than Hebrew. Paul knew that; he was a very well educated Jew and like all God fearing Jews of the time, he had at least Torah committed to memory, and probably most of the writings of the prophets.

If you study the ancient Hebrew language, you'll find all of it points directly to God. There is a Messianic message even in the first letter of Genesis 1:1. If any tongue is spoken in Heaven, it's Hebrew.

So, in other words, according to you the passage of Scripture should read . . .

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of men . . ."

godsgirl
Jul 8th 2008, 08:19 PM
I'm going to challenge you on this because I've heard this so many times.

You said:

"when I speak a message in tongues-I do not "understand" what is being said."

Question: how do you know you spoke in tongues? If you don't know what you said, you have no basis to make that claim.

You said:

"however, the same Holy Spirit who prompted me to speak out in a tongue is the same Holy Spirit who will give the "interpretation" to either me or another standing by."

Question: since no one understands what you said, how do you know it was the Holy Spirit who gave the interpretation?

Answer: You don't. You have no idea what is going on. How does anyone know whether you and your friends are not playing some kind of fun game? That's what people say. It's a fantasy role-playing game and you have no way to know.

I know because I have ears to hear.

I know whom I have believed. The bottom line is knowing Him and knowing His voice. If it is a fantasy role-playing game to you, then by all means, do not participate. The Bible says the gifts of the Spirit are given "as the Spirit wills". All that we do takes faith-but like I know that I am saived-I know that I know if He is prompting me to be used by the Spirit.

Jesus said that if we ask our Father for the Holy Spirit we do not need to be afraid of recieving a stone or a snake-I take His Word on it.

keck553
Jul 8th 2008, 08:25 PM
So, in other words, according to you the passage of Scripture should read . . .

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of men . . ."

Not at all. It should remain the same. The Tongues (organized, spoken languages) of men in those days spoke of 120 known languages and dialects, including Aramaic that was prevelant among Jews. The Tongues (Defined both in the Greek and Hebrew as language) of angels is represented in the Word of God as Hebrew. If you can find ONE reference of an angel speaking in acstatic terms, please enlighten us.

God's Word in the Bible is complete. No reason to complicate it or add to God's Word.

godsgirl
Jul 9th 2008, 12:39 AM
Not at all. It should remain the same. The Tongues (organized, spoken languages) of men in those days spoke of 120 known languages and dialects, including Aramaic that was prevelant among Jews. The Tongues (Defined both in the Greek and Hebrew as language) of angels is represented in the Word of God as Hebrew. If you can find ONE reference of an angel speaking in acstatic terms, please enlighten us.

God's Word in the Bible is complete. No reason to complicate it or add to God's Word.


So do you think angels only speak "hebrew" If an angel came and talked to you-would he speak Hebrew or would he speak the language you know?

VerticalReality
Jul 9th 2008, 02:22 AM
Not at all. It should remain the same. The Tongues (organized, spoken languages) of men in those days spoke of 120 known languages and dialects, including Aramaic that was prevelant among Jews. The Tongues (Defined both in the Greek and Hebrew as language) of angels is represented in the Word of God as Hebrew. If you can find ONE reference of an angel speaking in acstatic terms, please enlighten us.

God's Word in the Bible is complete. No reason to complicate it or add to God's Word.

Where in the Word of God does it declare that Hebrew is the language of angels and not of men?

BroRog
Jul 9th 2008, 05:38 AM
Um... perhaps you might respond to the Scripture? Is it correct and if so... challenge the Scripture.

What do you mean "challenge the scripture?" The scripture is not in question. When someone offers a personal testimony as a point of argument, are we not allowed to cross examine them? If you have a rule against this, then I will abide by it. In the future, I will simply ignore personal testimony.

But if someone says, "I know human beings can fly because I jumped off the Empire State Building and flew around New York City", I should be allowed to ask when, and did anyone else see you?

In this instance, godsgirl is offering her personal testimony as proof that her interpretation of 1Cor. 14 is correct. It's unusual for folks to use their own experience as a proof of an interpretation, but it happens. I personally believe that scripture should inform our experience when it comes to spiritual matter such as this, rather than the other way around. If we measure scripture against our own experience, how will scripture ever correct our errors?

If someone claims to speak in tongues, we should be allowed to ask, "what did you say and what language was it?" If that person can't answer the question, then he or she shouldn't go around claiming things that aren't true.

Thomas asked to see the holes in Jesus' hands. That's all I'm asking for.

Merton
Jul 9th 2008, 06:01 AM
God spells out obedience in plain and easy to understand terms. If this is a matter of obedience, then ONLY GOD can command it. Nowhere in all of scripture can I find God commanding His children to speak or pray in such ways. In fact, God commands quite the opposite.

I can't find in scriptures where vague emotional spasms of incomphrehensible grunts and mumblings is commanded by God. God gives commands and instructions, not Paul; he is only a rabbi, a teacher.

When in doubt, ask "What does God say?" Look to the Word of God if His prophets and teachers can't be properly understood in context.

I'm still waiting to see scripture supporting ecstatic utterances, and scripture that shows spiritual gifts are given for self centered edification.


Well, I do not speak in tongues much, but I sing in tongues and very well to and loud, but I am just unable to sing hardly otherwise, ( I am a quiet person) and while I can say a word or two in tongues when I want to, I do not sing just because I want to myself. I need company, as has happened after a surprise witness to someone who heard God in it.

One night I sang in Hebrew with all its little mannerisms for some hours straight (and never the same since, I tried it.) and the owners of the house went to bed and let me carry on, unable to join me, but it was what happened in that house the next day that told me that someone else was there that night and remained there after I had left.

When I started out, I used to drive for over an hour to and from some mid week meetings, and on the way home, I used to pray and sing in tongues and it occurred to me to try english to find out what I was saying and it was then that I knew exactly what prophesying really was, and some things from those days stand out to me in guiding me on my reading of the Bible because of the things I saw let alone spoke about.

I saw Christ on His Throne and His Father beside Him ruling, and recognized my Father also, when he gave me that knowing glance as I leant on Jesus knee asking Him something I was worried about. Well yes Jesus did say something to His Father in a language I could not understand, but I heard God say something to Jesus and myself very clearly which I understood.

My wife had dreams to, which answered questions I had, and we had one man who could not read or write (he being the town drunk also) who upon our request of God, which was motivated by Him to ask for, while we prayed and he slept, he had the most amazing dreams which reassured him that even if he fell off this muticoloured winged horse of his dream, that the Lord would catch him.

The Lord said to Him while he soared into the air, "Do not worry Kevin, if you fall off I will catch you."

Well he did fall off a bit, but I still remember him holding his chest, while crying and looking up to Heaven and thanking Jesus. He has died now, and I lost contact with him, but his brother gave a glowing report to me on his life since. It is not usual to have lost contact with any people saved during those times, for we were always a family group which many a church tried to break up by drawing people away. I feel sorry for them and those whose entire Christian experience is with a doctrine and a church.

I remember when a local preacher returnred from Egypt with glowing reports of fellowship into the early hours with sightings of angels and great glory, but while the congregation thought that amazing, many of them thought we were nuts only 6 miles out of their town with the same things sometimes. Well I suppose they did when it was rumored that we were hippies having nude parties and we went through the demon and burn up idols thing.

God is so good to show us the things he has in store for us, when so many evil things are happening around us, and we seem unable to stem the tide of them swamping over peoples lives.

One day we will be all powerful like Christ. I believe Him. He is not self centred and leaving suffering humanity in their woes, only to destroy them at His coming.

So many people are decent and kind and quietly believing of Him but spiritually ignorant, and definately not of the wicked, but have not received His Spirit yet, but I expect that many of them will.

So there you have it, either we tongues speakers are nuts or others are missing out.

I would not trade my place with anyone, but I have suffered a great deal from religious men because of what I went though and if the reader thinks that I did not add to my woes by my own hand then they would be very wrong.


God preserved life for the world through Noah and the ark and I see that He will do so again.

Rev 7:9 After these things I saw, and behold, a great crowd which no one was able to number them, out of every nation, even tribes and peoples and tongues, standing in front of the throne, and before the Lamb, having been clothed with white robes, and in their hands palm branches.
Rev 7:10 And they cry with a great voice, saying, Salvation to our God sitting on the throne, and to the Lamb.
Rev 7:11 And all the angels and of the elders and of the four living creatures stood around the throne. And they fell before the throne on their faces, and worshiped God,
Rev 7:12 saying, Amen. Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and strength to our God forever and ever. Amen.
Rev 7:13 And one of the elders answered, saying to me, These, the ones having been clothed in the white robes, who are they, and from where did they come?
Rev 7:14 And I said to him, Sir, you know. And he said to me, These are those coming out of the great tribulation; and they washed their robes and whitened them in the blood of the Lamb.

Merton.

Post-script. I sometimes write posts like this and not post them. This time I will.

godsgirl
Jul 9th 2008, 10:48 AM
What do you mean "challenge the scripture?" The scripture is not in question. When someone offers a personal testimony as a point of argument, are we not allowed to cross examine them? If you have a rule against this, then I will abide by it. In the future, I will simply ignore personal testimony.

But if someone says, "I know human beings can fly because I jumped off the Empire State Building and flew around New York City", I should be allowed to ask when, and did anyone else see you?

In this instance, godsgirl is offering her personal testimony as proof that her interpretation of 1Cor. 14 is correct. It's unusual for folks to use their own experience as a proof of an interpretation, but it happens. I personally believe that scripture should inform our experience when it comes to spiritual matter such as this, rather than the other way around. If we measure scripture against our own experience, how will scripture ever correct our errors?

If someone claims to speak in tongues, we should be allowed to ask, "what did you say and what language was it?" If that person can't answer the question, then he or she shouldn't go around claiming things that aren't true.

Thomas asked to see the holes in Jesus' hands. That's all I'm asking for.


The Word stands-my testimony just goes along with it. I am offended that you would call me a "liar". I certianly don't hold my experiences up instead of the Word. You are the one who is doing that-since you haven't seen the holes-you are convinced that they are not there-and refuse to look.

keck553
Jul 9th 2008, 05:39 PM
Ecc 1:9 That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

God's Word is complete. Angels talk in Hebrew. God and His prophets say so. No further speculation necessary.

VerticalReality
Jul 9th 2008, 06:10 PM
Ecc 1:9 That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

God's Word is complete. Angels talk in Hebrew. God and His prophets say so. No further speculation necessary.


Where does God's Word state that angels speak in Hebrew? It's not that Ecclesiastes passage, so what else you got?

Additionally, where does the Word state that Hebrew is what will be spoken in heaven?

keck553
Jul 9th 2008, 09:54 PM
So do you think angels only speak "hebrew" If an angel came and talked to you-would he speak Hebrew or would he speak the language you know?

When an angel talks with me or to me, I'll be sure and let you know.

Still, you missed the point. We have witnesses in the Word of God to angel's speech. All references to the language of angels was in organized, understandable human language.

Do you really think that when our Creator talked to and with Adam in Gan-Eden, He said "Zmithdiy&()$# ss&)5a;cjh"? Does the bible teach that? On the contrary, the bible teaches God Himself spoke in a human terms.

Nothing in the bible states angel talk consists of acstatic grunts and voicings. So I ask you again, where does it say in the bible people pray to God in what sounds to others as mumbles, grunts and babble?

keck553
Jul 9th 2008, 09:57 PM
Where does God's Word state that angels speak in Hebrew? It's not that Ecclesiastes passage, so what else you got?

Additionally, where does the Word state that Hebrew is what will be spoken in heaven?

All you have to do is study Genesis 1:1. God raised up Israel to His Way, so why do you think God would allow something so important as thier language to be chosen by them?

Are you willing to get into Genesis 1:1 and see what the Hebrew in that one verse reveals about God's nature?


בראשׁית ברא אלהים את השׁמים ואת הארץ׃
This one line has the creation of the universe, the beginning and the end, and our Messiah wrapped up in it. But most read "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." There is no depth in the english translation. You find me all of what I said is in this verse in english and I will show you how rich this same verse is in Hebrew.

You really think the Jews or any human would be able to create such depth?

godsgirl
Jul 9th 2008, 10:38 PM
When an angel talks with me or to me, I'll be sure and let you know.

Still, you missed the point. We have witnesses in the Word of God to angel's speech. All references to the language of angels was in organized, understandable human language.

Do you really think that when our Creator talked to and with Adam in Gan-Eden, He said "Zmithdiy&()$# ss&)5a;cjh"? Does the bible teach that? On the contrary, the bible teaches God Himself spoke in a human terms.

Nothing in the bible states angel talk consists of acstatic grunts and voicings. So I ask you again, where does it say in the bible people pray to God in what sounds to others as mumbles, grunts and babble?


You missed the point too-who said anything about "mumbles, grunts, and babble"? Only you. And what in the world does "acstatic grunts and voicings" mean?

keck553
Jul 9th 2008, 10:46 PM
It means noises and voicings which are unrecognizable as human communication and not known as any human language. Yes, I said Human. God made us, gave us a voice, and set our distinct and recognizable languages at Babel.

I've been around Pentacostals. We both know what I am referring to.

godsgirl
Jul 10th 2008, 12:27 AM
Actually, no I do not. I know that you are using your words in a hateful.demeaning way-but hey, what did I expect?
It always comes down to that for those of you who cannot defend your beliefs using scripture.

the Bible says, "he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to man, but to God--INDEED NO ONE UNDERSTANDS-in the Spirit he speaks mysteries"

Even if he speaks Swahili


And it's "P-E-N-T-E-C-O-S-T-A-L."

threebigrocks
Jul 10th 2008, 12:38 AM
Let's turn the tone of this thread around, or it will have lived out it's life here and will be closed.

VerticalReality
Jul 10th 2008, 02:16 AM
All you have to do is study Genesis 1:1. God raised up Israel to His Way, so why do you think God would allow something so important as thier language to be chosen by them?

Are you willing to get into Genesis 1:1 and see what the Hebrew in that one verse reveals about God's nature?


בראשׁית ברא אלהים את השׁמים ואת הארץ׃
This one line has the creation of the universe, the beginning and the end, and our Messiah wrapped up in it. But most read "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." There is no depth in the english translation. You find me all of what I said is in this verse in english and I will show you how rich this same verse is in Hebrew.

You really think the Jews or any human would be able to create such depth?

So, in other words, you have nowhere in Scripture to reference that says angels speak in Hebrew . . .

threebigrocks
Jul 10th 2008, 02:25 AM
Enough, thread closed.