How To Understand 1 Corinthians 14th Chapter

[Stranger]

Since the devil's tongues have come without interpretation as vain and profane babbling gibberish BEFORE Pentecost; for you to assign God's gift of tongues that it can ALSO be for private use IS saying God mimics the devil's tongues.

(1 Cor. 14:18-19) "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with m y understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also...."

Here Paul is declaring his use of tongues outside of the church. "Yet in the Church"

Tongues are for the individuals use who has them. It doesn't have to be in the church.

Stranger

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

(1 Cor. 14:18-19) "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with m y understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also...."

Here Paul is declaring his use of tongues outside of the church. "Yet in the Church"

Tongues are for the individuals use who has them. It doesn't have to be in the church.

Stranger

That is an example of reading in between the lines that tongue speakers usually do, Stranger. Read that in context.

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

You left out the latter part of that verse, Stranger. Why? Because you know it is about speaking in tongues in church as Paul's message is about those who speak in tongues without interpretation whereby the other is not edified, because it is not coming with interpretation.

Then Paul gave the bottom line on tongues so you do not mistake what he is trying to say thru out that chapter. Pay attention.

20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. 21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

And yet the kind of tongue you are defending as just being gibberish and thus it must be for private use ONLY comes by a phenomenon that happens later in life of a saved believer of feeling what they believe was the holy Spirit coming over them in bringing that tongue; which is why there is that promotion as another calling given to saved believers to seek after the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the sign of tongues. That is why Paul said next..

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

But somehow, tongue speakers just don't want to believe that is what Paul is really saying because they want that extra phenomenon to be of Him as that tongue for private use sets them apart & above the average believer from the testimony we are all suppose to share and speak the sane thing by.

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

If you don't see the evil yet, then YOU better pray because asking Him to help you see is better than waiting for Him to make you see, especially when deep down you don't want to see that tongues for private use can never be of Him at all when that kind of tongue been in the world before Pentecost.

 

[Stranger]

That is an example of reading in between the lines that tongue speakers usually do, Stranger. Read that in context.

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

You left out the latter part of that verse, Stranger. Why? Because you know it is about speaking in tongues in church as Paul's message is about those who speak in tongues without interpretation whereby the other is not edified, because it is not coming with interpretation.

Then Paul gave the bottom line on tongues so you do not mistake what he is trying to say thru out that chapter. Pay attention.

20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. 21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

And yet the kind of tongue you are defending as just being gibberish and thus it must be for private use ONLY comes by a phenomenon that happens later in life of a saved believer of feeling what they believe was the holy Spirit coming over them in bringing that tongue; which is why there is that promotion as another calling given to saved believers to seek after the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the sign of tongues. That is why Paul said next..

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

But somehow, tongue speakers just don't want to believe that is what Paul is really saying because they want that extra phenomenon to be of Him as that tongue for private use sets them apart & above the average believer from the testimony we are all suppose to share and speak the sane thing by.

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

If you don't see the evil yet, then YOU better pray because asking Him to help you see is better than waiting for Him to make you see, especially when deep down you don't want to see that tongues for private use can never be of Him at all when that kind of tongue been in the world before Pentecost.

I wrote enough of the verse to produce the meaning. From what I wrote you could see that Paul would rather prophecy in the assembly than speak in tongues. Nothing was being avoided.

Paul's statement in (1 Cor. 14:18-19) is clear. He speaks in tongues more than anyone. Yet in the assembly he would rather speak with understanding. The 'only' conclusion you can draw from that is that Paul spake in tongues privately.

Stranger

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

I wrote enough of the verse to produce the meaning. From what I wrote you could see that Paul would rather prophecy in the assembly than speak in tongues. Nothing was being avoided.

Paul's statement in (1 Cor. 14:18-19) is clear. He speaks in tongues more than anyone. Yet in the assembly he would rather speak with understanding. The 'only' conclusion you can draw from that is that Paul spake in tongues privately.

Stranger

That is the only conclusion you wish to draw when he said he would rather speak five words understood than a thousands in the assembly not understood for why prophesy is better than tongues as the gift to seek after.

The way you apply his words, Paul is stupid because tongues in private is way better than prophesy and sure enough, the way tongue speakers talk today about all the benefits of tongues for private use... that is more valued than prophesying. You make Paul out as undermining his own message as to which gift to covert after. By you and every modern day tongue speaker out there, Paul failed epic because you want him to fail for tongues to be greater than prophesy.

Paul was never talking about tongues for private use when he was talking about why prophesy was better than tongues in the assembly since he was exhorting believers when seeking spiritual gift, to seek the gift of prophesy to edify the church. So you are reading in between the lines and undermining the points of Paul's exhortation for believers when seeking spiritual gift BECAUSE you guys are not hyping prophesy, but tongues for private use.

Do you speak in tongues?

Had you ever at one time spoken in tongues?

Had you ever experienced a supernatural phenomenon in your life as a believer that had happened apart from salvation?

Had you ever fallen down in your life as a believer by a supernatural phenomenon?

If you had answered the questions.. somehow I had missed it, but if you had not, then why not?

 

[Enoch111]

That is the only conclusion you wish to draw when he said he would rather speak five words understood than a thousands in the assembly not understood for why prophesy is better than tongues as the gift to seek after.

That is 5 vs 10,000. Quite a contrast. Something to think about seriously.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

That is 5 vs 10,000. Quite a contrast. Something to think about seriously.

Especially when those five words is understood right away rather than waiting for the interpretation of those thousands words not understood yet.

 

[Jun2u]

To the OP only.

IMO the writer of the Op does not understand the meaning of the phenomenon of speaking in tongues, that is, what is it?

Why is it more significant to prophesy than to speak in tongues?
,
Is tongues still for today, and if not, why?

I read the Op but can you elaborate between the two anyway?

Ty

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

To the OP only.

IMO the writer of the Op does not understand the meaning of the phenomenon of speaking in tongues, that is, what is it?

Why is it more significant to prophesy than to speak in tongues?
,
Is tongues still for today, and if not, why?

I read the Op but can you elaborate between the two anyway?

Ty

1 Corinthians 12:4-13 testify that there is no seeking to receive the Holy Spirit apart from salvation to get any gift of the Spirit, let alone the gift of tongues which is of other men's lips to speak unto the people. Those who testify to receiving the Holy Spirit again, in order to get that tongue for private use are ignoring that the gifts manifested are done by the same Spirit that we all have been baptized by at our salvation.

The kind of tongues that seem to be in abundance today is linked to a supernatural phenomenon where believers are assuming that was the Holy Spirit coming over them at a time as standing apart from when they were saved. This is why that kind of tongue is just gibberish as coming with no interpretation, because it is not the real God's gift of tongues as that was not the Holy Spirit coming over them when He was already in them since they were saved.

If the real God's gift of tongues is being used today... it will never be associated with that second phenomenon, never for private use, and it will come with interpretation in the assembly unless otherwise understood by a foreigner in outreach ministry as it is meant for God to speak unto the people only.

 

[Stranger]

That is the only conclusion you wish to draw when he said he would rather speak five words understood than a thousands in the assembly not understood for why prophesy is better than tongues as the gift to seek after.

The way you apply his words, Paul is stupid because tongues in private is way better than prophesy and sure enough, the way tongue speakers talk today about all the benefits of tongues for private use... that is more valued than prophesying. You make Paul out as undermining his own message as to which gift to covert after. By you and every modern day tongue speaker out there, Paul failed epic because you want him to fail for tongues to be greater than prophesy.

Paul was never talking about tongues for private use when he was talking about why prophesy was better than tongues in the assembly since he was exhorting believers when seeking spiritual gift, to seek the gift of prophesy to edify the church. So you are reading in between the lines and undermining the points of Paul's exhortation for believers when seeking spiritual gift BECAUSE you guys are not hyping prophesy, but tongues for private use.

Do you speak in tongues?

Had you ever at one time spoken in tongues?

Had you ever experienced a supernatural phenomenon in your life as a believer that had happened apart from salvation?

Had you ever fallen down in your life as a believer by a supernatural phenomenon?

If you had answered the questions.. somehow I had missed it, but if you had not, then why not?

No, it is the only conclusion.

Neither I or Paul said tongues in private is better than prophecy. That is what you are attempting to make me say.

I am not reading between the lines, I am reading the lines. "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church...." (1 Cor. 14:18-19) Pretty simple. Paul speaks with tongues outside the church.

Your questions are of no interest to me, as they do not affect what I or you are saying.

Stranger

 

[Jun2u]

1 Corinthians 12:4-13 testify that there is no seeking to receive the Holy Spirit apart from salvation to get any gift of the Spirit, let alone the gift of tongues which is of other men's lips to speak unto the people. Those who testify to receiving the Holy Spirit again, in order to get that tongue for private use are ignoring that the gifts manifested are done by the same Spirit that we all have been baptized by at our salvation.

The kind of tongues that seem to be in abundance today is linked to a supernatural phenomenon where believers are assuming that was the Holy Spirit coming over them at a time as standing apart from when they were saved. This is why that kind of tongue is just gibberish as coming with no interpretation, because it is not the real God's gift of tongues as that was not the Holy Spirit coming over them when He was already in them since they were saved.

If the real God's gift of tongues is being used today... it will never be associated with that second phenomenon, never for private use, and it will come with interpretation in the assembly unless otherwise understood by a foreigner in outreach ministry as it is meant for God to speak unto the people only.

I'm sorry but you still do NOT understand the meaning of speaking in tongues and until you do there can be no dialog between us.

Is there anyone who posted here know what is the meaning of speaking in tongues? Anyone?

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

No, it is the only conclusion.

Neither I or Paul said tongues in private is better than prophecy. That is what you are attempting to make me say.

I am not reading between the lines, I am reading the lines. "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church...." (1 Cor. 14:18-19) Pretty simple. Paul speaks with tongues outside the church.

Your questions are of no interest to me, as they do not affect what I or you are saying.

Stranger

It does. Pride goes before the fall always does.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

I'm sorry but you still do NOT understand the meaning of speaking in tongues and until you do there can be no dialog between us.

Is there anyone who posted here know what is the meaning of speaking in tongues? Anyone?

Well if you do not know 1 Corinthians 14:20-21 where Paul is giving the low down on what God's gift of tongues really is and that it is of other men's lips for God to speak unto the people.... then when a supernatural tongue does not do that, how can you not see it as NOT the real God's gift of tongues?

 

[Stranger]

It does. Pride goes before the fall always does.

Don't mistake disagreeing with you as 'pride'. If you want to predict my 'fall', you will have to get in line, And it is pretty long.

Stranger

 

[Enoch111]

"I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church...." (1 Cor. 14:18-19) Pretty simple. Paul speaks with tongues outside the church.

Tongues means languages, plain and simple. He could very well be referring to the fact that he was knowledgeable in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and possibly Latin. Perhaps he could speak Arabic since he spent some time in Arabia. Perhaps he had picked up other languages along the way. There is no record that Paul spoke in tongues (as a spiritual gift) even at the time he was converted or baptized. But since he refers to the church (assembly) he did have that gift, yet would rather speak 5 words of prophesy than 10,000 words in tongues. Which implies that in God's view tongues are the least of the gifts.

The point that Paul is stressing throughout 1 Cor 14 is that in general prophecy (at that time) was far superior to tongues when communicating God's truths. We could say the same thing today, that the preaching of the Gospel for the salvation of souls, and the teaching of the Word for the edification of the saints is far superior to speaking foreign languages supernaturally (which is not even the case today, and which would be rare indeed even among missionaries who spend years learning foreign languages).

Paul is also stressing that for the apostolic churches (which always had a mixture of Jews and Gentiles) tongues were a sign to the Jews that God was at work and that the Gospel and New Testament truths were from God.

 

[Stranger]

Tongues means languages, plain and simple. He could very well be referring to the fact that he was knowledgeable in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and possibly Latin. Perhaps he could speak Arabic since he spent some time in Arabia. Perhaps he had picked up other languages along the way. There is no record that Paul spoke in tongues (as a spiritual gift) even at the time he was converted or baptized. But since he refers to the church (assembly) he did have that gift, yet would rather speak 5 words of prophesy than 10,000 words in tongues. Which implies that in God's view tongues are the least of the gifts.

The point that Paul is stressing throughout 1 Cor 14 is that in general prophecy (at that time) was far superior to tongues when communicating God's truths. We could say the same thing today, that the preaching of the Gospel for the salvation of souls, and the teaching of the Word for the edification of the saints is far superior to speaking foreign languages supernaturally (which is not even the case today, and which would be rare indeed even among missionaries who spend years learning foreign languages).

Paul is also stressing that for the apostolic churches (which always had a mixture of Jews and Gentiles) tongues were a sign to the Jews that God was at work and that the Gospel and New Testament truths were from God.

No it doesn't. (1 Cor. 13:1) "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels...."

Stranger

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Don't mistake disagreeing with you as 'pride'. If you want to predict my 'fall', you will have to get in line, And it is pretty long.

Stranger

Avoiding the questions that is relevant to the discussion is suspicious because your answers can show the influence for why you are being argumentative, and thus prideful.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Tongues means languages, plain and simple. He could very well be referring to the fact that he was knowledgeable in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and possibly Latin. Perhaps he could speak Arabic since he spent some time in Arabia. Perhaps he had picked up other languages along the way. There is no record that Paul spoke in tongues (as a spiritual gift) even at the time he was converted or baptized. But since he refers to the church (assembly) he did have that gift, yet would rather speak 5 words of prophesy than 10,000 words in tongues. Which implies that in God's view tongues are the least of the gifts.

The point that Paul is stressing throughout 1 Cor 14 is that in general prophecy (at that time) was far superior to tongues when communicating God's truths. We could say the same thing today, that the preaching of the Gospel for the salvation of souls, and the teaching of the Word for the edification of the saints is far superior to speaking foreign languages supernaturally (which is not even the case today, and which would be rare indeed even among missionaries who spend years learning foreign languages).

Paul is also stressing that for the apostolic churches (which always had a mixture of Jews and Gentiles) tongues were a sign to the Jews that God was at work and that the Gospel and New Testament truths were from God.

I have to ask if something is missing in translation of 1 Corinthians 14:4


At this link below...

http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm

On the left column if you scroll down to 1 Corinthians and then click on the blue number 14, it should flip the main section of your page to that chapter.

There are blue Greek words mirroring the verses in English. Verse 4 is the one in question regarding the Greek word eauton.

"from a reflexive pronoun otherwise obsolete and the genitive case (dative case or accusative case) of autoV - autos 846; him- (her-, it-, them-, also (in conjunction with the personal pronoun of the other persons) my-, thy-, our-, your-) self (selves), etc.:--alone, her (own, -self), (he) himself, his (own), itself, one (to) another, our (thine) own(-selves), + that she had, their (own, own selves), (of) them(-selves), they, thyself, you, your (own, own conceits, own selves, -selves).

I know that KJV Greek words are not always expressed to its full meaning in the English; and it gets worse even in modern bibles.

14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Definition for conceit is:

1. excessive pride in oneself.
   "he was puffed up with conceit"
   synonyms: vanity · narcissism · conceitedness · self-love · self-admiration ·
   image · imagery · figurative expression · metaphor · simile · trope ·
   [more]
   • an artistic effect or device.
     "the director's brilliant conceit was to film this tale in black and white"
   • a fanciful notion.
     "he is alarmed by the widespread conceit that he spent most of the 1980s drunk"

I mean.. anti-KJVonlyists contenders cited that "unknown" was inserted in there and does not belong, but this Greek word, "glwssh" allows it.

"of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):--tongue."

So I am wondering if the full message and intent of the former part of that verse in 1 Corinthians 14:4 is in the Greek is being overlooked in all Bibles.

I say that because of Luke 17:37 in how anti-KJV contenders argue that eagles should be vultures in how that verses was about God removing evil from the earth, even though that would make that verse fall out of context of the message of that warning given beforehand when it was about the saints leaving before destruction comes and not be like Lot's wife in not wanting to leave. Meaning... vulture is not eagles at all.

But anyway.. there is a meaning overlooked in the Greek word out of this phrase "sunacqhsontai oi aetoi"

The first Greek word means "from sun - sun 4862 and agw - ago 71; to lead together, i.e. collect or convene; specially, to entertain (hospitably):--+ accompany, assemble (selves, together), bestow, come together, gather (selves together, up, together), lead into, resort, take in."

So that part of that Greek word per its meaning is not conveyed in verse 37 even in the KJV in what kind of a removal that is.

And so I wonder if "own conceit" was being overlooked in how it was used per the case usage when just translating that Greek word "eauton" as just meaning own selves to himself in the KJV when it really meant to his own conceit when it is being a comparison for why prophesy is better?

 

[Enoch111]

No it doesn't. (1 Cor. 13:1) "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels...."

Actually this verse confirms that the gift of tongues was not for private use! Love (agape = charity) TOWARDS OTHERS would be necessary in order to properly exercise this gift, and without it tongues would simply be noise (to paraphrase).

 

[Enoch111]

I mean.. anti-KJVonlyists contenders cited that "unknown" was inserted in there and does not belong, but this Greek word, "glwssh" allows it.

Since I use the KJV consistently I can certainly respond. The KJV translators believed they were helping the readers of their time by inserting "unknown" repeatedly before "tongues" (which today would consistenly be "languages"). What it implied was that the language spoken by the tongues-speaker was unknown to him, hence it was being spoken supernaturally by the power of the Spirit. But the confusion that it has caused is that some now believe that "unknown" means not an ordinary human language, hence the term *ecstatic utterances* or glossolalia (essentially gibberish).

But you will not find glossolalia in Scripture. It is always glossa or glossais (unless dialektos is used). Then we have some who believe that there was a special language spoken by angels, when Paul is simply using hyperbole when he says "tongues of men and angels". Angels always communicated with men in human languages, and even in Revelation what they say is clearly understood by John.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Since I use the KJV consistently I can certainly respond. The KJV translators believed they were helping the readers of their time by inserting "unknown" repeatedly before "tongues" (which today would consistenly be "languages"). What it implied was that the language spoken by the tongues-speaker was unknown to him, hence it was being spoken supernaturally by the power of the Spirit. But the confusion that it has caused is that some now believe that "unknown" means not an ordinary human language, hence the term *ecstatic utterances* or glossolalia (essentially gibberish).

But you will not find glossolalia in Scripture. It is always glossa or glossais (unless dialektos is used). Then we have some who believe that there was a special language spoken by angels, when Paul is simply using hyperbole when he says "tongues of men and angels". Angels always communicated with men in human languages, and even in Revelation what they say is clearly understood by John.

Thanks for clarifying that you are in agreement on those 2 side points, but I was referring to the main point of 1 Corinthians 14:4 as not fully conveying the full meaning of "eauton" as being more than "himself", but "his own conceit" in that verse like it did not convey the full meaning of "sunacqhsontai" in Luke 17:37.

I am discerning whether or not it should be written as this below as per the actual meaning of the Greek word in that verse;

14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth to his own conceit; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.