Tongues

[CharismaticLady]

Just to add to your enjoyable post.
If we carefully examine the context of why Paul asked the question "do all speak in tongues?" he is reminding us of what he said in 1 Corinthians 12 about the body of Christ being made up of many parts. Therefore his questions to ministry in the church. He could also ask, "Is everyone the pastor?' or "Is everyone a musician?" In this sense when he asks the question about tongues he is talking about the ministry gift of tongues in the church context.

But when he is saying, "I would you all spoke in tongues", and "I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all", he is not speaking of the ministry gift of tongues that is in tandem with interpretation of tongues. He is talking about personal prayer in tongues when he is alone with God. It makes sense, really, because why should he say, "I would that you all spoke with tongues" if he has already said that speaking with tongues in church is pointless because no one understands and therefore is not built up? And when he says, "I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all", if he spoke it in church more than all of them who were speaking in tongues in the meetings, wouldn't he be contradicting his own instructions?

Of course, you and I would see that quite clearly, but one who is prejudiced against tongues would not want to use basic comprehension because taking that sort of intelligent approach to what Paul is actually saying would cause his opposition to tongues go down like the Hindenburg - in flames!

Oh! Consistency in comprehension, thou art a jewel!!

Yes, I said the same thing, but you explained it better. the gifts of tongues and interpretation of 1 Cor. 12 are what I call "offices." Just as not everyone has the same office, not everyone has the need for an office gift for ministry. That is why:

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 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. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts.

Don't you just want to cry when some teacher on the radio claims that this passage proves not all believers receive a prayer language? Context, context, context!

 

[Paul Christensen]

ok then we are not even talking about the same thing then. i am talking about the angel / spirit, ba ba sha wa. i am not talking about real languages. this is like the 5th time i have said that.

I had an appointment this afternoon, so I had to leave for a while.

Two points of interest:
In all the 55 years I have been praying in tongues, I have heard all the points of opposition to it, and none of it has convinced me that I am doing anything but praying to the Lord in accordance with His Word. In fact, I have experienced more to actually support it fully, through the way the Holy Spirit has responded to my prayer, and the time when my tongues language was clearly understood by a native speaker of the language I had never learned. The languages I have prayed over the years have been expressive, articulate, well, constructed languages, and the effect of my praying as been to increase my faith in the finished work of Christ on the Cross, and has opened up insights into the Bible I hadn't seen clearly beforehand. Also, as a result of intercessory prayer in tongues for a woman in hospital 12,000 miles away in the UK, whose life was in danger, the uncontrolled bleeding stopped at precisely the time I prayed for her in tongues. It was testified to me by her son who was with her at the time and had asked me to intercede for her.

My second point: Please explain why Paul said, "I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all". and "I would that you all speak in tongues". if he recommended people not to speak in tongues during the church meeting, but rather prophesy instead. Is Paul contradicting himself, if the tongues he is speaking of is just confined to speaking in church services?

1 Corinthians 14:2 says that "no man understands" when a person speaks in tongues, which suggests that under normal circumstances the language of tongues is not usually understood, and that times where the language has been understood is because of a definite action with a definite purpose by the Holy
Spirit for a definite person He wants to minister to. Also, verse 2 is the only descriptions of that tongues actually is: "speaking mysteries in the Spirit". This implies that when a person is praying in tongues, he is speaking to God, as Paul says in verse two, in language that God alone understands and who knows what these mysteries are.

My next point is: speaking in tongues is not confined to Pentecostal or Charismatic churches. When I left the movement, I didn't stop praying in tongues. The reason it that it is not church-oriented, but it is Bible. That is why it wouldn't matter which church I decide to join, that wouldn't stop me praying in tongues, because it would have nothing to do with the church I belong to at all.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Yes, I said the same thing, but you explained it better. the gifts of tongues and interpretation of 1 Cor. 12 are what I call "offices." Just as not everyone has the same office, not everyone has the need for an office gift for ministry. That is why:

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 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. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts.

Don't you just want to cry when some teacher on the radio claims that this passage proves not all believers receive a prayer language? Context, context, context!

I think you might have read my previous post where I quoted John Calvin who said that the evidence of a ministry calling from God is that there is the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit in that person's ministry.

This leads me to wonder about ministries that don't have any evidence of the gifts of the Spirit operating through them, whether those "ministries" are really called of God, or are they appointed by men or even self-appointed. Food for thought...

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think you might have read my previous post where I quoted John Calvin who said that the evidence of a ministry calling from God is that there is the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit in that person's ministry.

This leads me to wonder about ministries that don't have any evidence of the gifts of the Spirit operating through them, whether those "ministries" are really called of God, or are they appointed by men or even self-appointed. Food for thought...

I must have missed it. If Calvin said that about the gifts of the Spirit, why are so many Calvinists Cessationists.

Good night, my friend.

 

[Triumph1300]

the prayer language this is an interesting one. so lets say you have two sick kids, both moms kneel down to pray, one mom prays in her common language they way Jesus teaches, the other mom prays in the spirit prayer language. which prayer does the Lord hear? which child gets helped?

Both.

 

[marksman]

I never understood tongues, why would the Most High give a gift that anyone can do? The gift also serves no purpose. The only benefit it seems to have is you can tell people you speak in tongues.

It is not true that anyone can speak in another language which in many cases in scripture is what it means. This serves the purpose of someone who does not know a language to speak it to someone in the room without first learning the language.

 

[jaybird]

Don't confuse the real from the fake. I was talking about the real, and you responded about the fake to discredit the real.

Fake tongues are not "speaking in tongues" that are legitimate. That is why I told Paul C. that the interpretation proved that the tongues he spoke were legitimate. As for fake tongues you mentioned, I can tell the difference between them and the real gift of tongues. And I'm afraid there are those who "try" to speak in tongues before they are even born again. Their zeal would produce fake tongues of the flesh, not the Holy Spirit - but NOT of another spirit though either as mockers try to accuse. It is ironic that mocker are the ones not of God. Psalms 1:1

I'll say it again, you must be born again of the Spirit to receive any signs or gifts of the Spirit. But anyone who has actually been initially baptized in the Spirit (born again) is given the authorities of Mark 16 for individual use, Acts 2. The gifts of 1 Cor. 12 usually require a second filling of the Spirit - or release of power for the profit of all - for ministry, Acts 4:29-31. Personally, I received both fillings at once when I was born again on Feb. 9, 1977.

What Paul C. was speaking was the gift of diverse kinds of tongues that require interpretation (1 Cor. 12). But our prayer language does not require interpretation as it is prayer and only meant for God's ears. That is why in Mark 16:16-18 interpretation is not mentioned. It is not required. But in 1 Cor. 12 diverse kinds of tongues is mentioned along with interpretation of tongues. You see there are many that erroneous demand that our prayer language is not real unless it is interpreted. That is just ignorance of the difference between the two different kinds of speaking in tongues and the difference between the direction for our personal use, and what is a message from God that requires interpretation for the profit of all.

Ok but you didn't listen to what I told you before, I explained how one can fake this and there is no way to test it. Fake, real, either way sounds the exact same to the non tongue people. This is the exact opposite of any other gift from the Most High which could never in a million years be faked.
If you can't prove which is real then anyone that can talk can speak in the angel language.
And of all the gifts which ones are being done by everyone, the one that can easily be faked, the one that can not be proved. Sorry but that's a pretty big red flag.
Can you imagine Jesus going out, making divine claims, and not being able to prove any of them. But unlike tongues, Jesus backed up everything He did.

 

[NayborBear]

Far as I'm concerned? The requirement of one speaking in tongues says to me, that this particular assembly of believers(?) is saying to the "rest", or other parts of the body of Christ?
WE DON'T NEED YOU!
In a direct repudiation of:
1 Corinthians 12:
4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
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.
15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

(My apologies if this has already been posted.)

 

[NayborBear]

Tongues as a sign to unbelievers. (1 Corinthians 14:22) This is the phenomenon that took place on the day of Pentecost. (Acts2:4-11) It occurs when the Holy Spirit transcends the intellect and all language barriers by empowering a believer to preach, teach or testify about Christ in some language of man of which the believer himself has no knowledge.

The most interesting part concerning this particular "speaking in tongues" to the "gathered throng", is that each individual person heard that which was being said as if the "message" was being spoken by someone from their home town! WITHOUT an interpreter!

 

[jaybird]

The one who knows who she is in Jesus and commands by faith the sickness to leave in the name of Jesus.

That has nothing to do with praying in a special language, are you saying the prayer language doesn't make a difference?

Tongues are for when you DON'T know the will of God. It is perfect prayer according to the perfect will of God.

None of us know the will of the Most High, if the spirit language unlocked all the mysteries of the Father then these churches should have all the answers which they do not.
If it's a language that makes prayer perfect, then back to the question, which mother prayer is heard?
So far all you have done is explain that it's a way to pray but have yet to explain how it's different. Telling me it's perfect doesn't explain anything, you need to show me how the end result is different than prayer in the common language.

 

[NayborBear]

Why not? There are multitudes of testimonies of native speakers of a language hearing someone speaking in their language when speaking in tongues. I am not talking about the "ba ba sha wa" stuff that some speak. True tongues is a deliberately spoken articulate language properly constructed and spoken with expression, because it is a language spoken directly to God. You will note that those speaking in tongues out loud in church meetings without interpretation are disobeying God's Word as Paul taught it in 1 Corinthians 14. So I can believe that much that you hear spoken in meetings could very well be of the flesh because the Holy Spirit will support only total obedience to God's Word.

It seems with all this "speaking in tongues" conversatings, what's being "overlooked" either knowingly willing, or by a lack of Spiritual maturity is this:
1 Corinthians 14:
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself (selfishly?); but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

 

[Pearl]

Tongues are for when you DON'T know the will of God. It is perfect prayer according to the perfect will of God.

Yes! If you don't know how to pray and then pray in your [spiritual' language or tongue you will often find that when you have finished and you start praying in English the words that come out of your mouth are not what you regularly use and you find yourself being amazed by what you are saying. And then when the prayer is over you can't remember what you said. This is a form of interpretation.

 

[Pearl]

He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself

I find that to be true, almost like you're prophesying to yourself.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Ok but you didn't listen to what I told you before, I explained how one can fake this and there is no way to test it. Fake, real, either way sounds the exact same to the non tongue people. This is the exact opposite of any other gift from the Most High which could never in a million years be faked.
If you can't prove which is real then anyone that can talk can speak in the angel language.
And of all the gifts which ones are being done by everyone, the one that can easily be faked, the one that can not be proved. Sorry but that's a pretty big red flag.
Can you imagine Jesus going out, making divine claims, and not being able to prove any of them. But unlike tongues, Jesus backed up everything He did.

It is designed that way. It is a peculiar gift, none other like it. It is the only sign gift that is the same type of sign that Jesus, Himself, was. Did you know that Jesus was a sign? Luke 2:34 calls Him "a sign which will be spoken against." Jesus was for "the fall and rising of many in Israel." IOW it is a double edged sign, having both a negative and positive side to it depending on who is responding. The disciples rose, while most of the Pharisees fell and wanted Him dead. And these signs are the only ones that reveal the secrets of the heart by the response they generate.

Jesus - Luke 2:35 "that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”
Tongues -1 Cor. 14:25 "thus the secrets of his heart are revealed."

In 1 Corinthians 14:22 we see that "tongues are for a sign to the unbeliever." Without meaning to, there are so many Christians that see that and immediately think of the Day of Pentecost when the devout Jews turned to Christ after each heard the disciples speak in tongues, and erroneously believe it only means that tongues is a positive sign, even going so far as it was for preaching the gospel. But it is double edged. Remember there were others who mocked and said they were drunk. Verse 22 is showing the negative side to tongues, and verse 23 confirms it that if ALL were speaking in tongues and an unbeliever came in and saw them, they would say they were crazy. Today, the mockers use the words "gibberish" or "babble." So it confirms them in their unbelief, and reveals their hearts.

That is why Paul made restrictions inside the church, that only 2 or 3 speak in "gibberish" and immediately is interpreted. And if the interpreter is not there, then no one is to stand up and speak forth a message from God in just tongues. Because no man understands them. 1 Cor. 14:2

So it really doesn't matter that you can't test tongues. They are bonafide gifts of the Holy Spirit, so you can either accept their existence with the faith of a child, or speak against them. The test is actually about us, not them.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Yes! If you don't know how to pray and then pray in your [spiritual' language or tongue you will often find that when you have finished and you start praying in English the words that come out of your mouth are not what you regularly use and you find yourself being amazed by what you are saying. And then when the prayer is over you can't remember what you said. This is a form of interpretation.

Interesting. Why do you think you can't remember what you said?

 

[Robert Gwin]

I saw the following post elsewhere.
Any comments?


It's been an issue inside the Assemblies of God denomination concerning speaking in tongues. There was a group of younger ministers that sought to "fight" the long-held doctrinal stance that the baptism with the Holy Ghost is always evidenced by speaking with other tongues. Up until like a decade or so ago, I know the Assemblies of God had their big conference and reinstated the position that a Christian must speak with other tongues in order to have received the Holy Ghost.

It's a requirement for their ministers, evangelists, and for anyone they ordain to have experience the baptism with the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking with other tongues. I know a lot of their churches on an individual level have moved away from this position overall. They don't typically place a strong emphasis on the baptism with the Holy Ghost, but tend to align with a more evangelical, semi-charismatic doctrine.

I've heard a lot here recently that the Assemblies of God had "voted out" speaking in tongues. That's where I'm drawing my theory from.

The key lies in the reason why speaking in tongues originated sir, to spread the gospel. The gifts of the spirit were to diminish as the faith increased. With the death of the apostles, most gifts such as tongues and healing no longer occurred. Before the end Christians were cautioned not to use it without an interpreter. With the good news reaching the ends of the earth today, most likely God is not using them anymore to spread His message.

 

[CharismaticLady]

The most interesting part concerning this particular "speaking in tongues" to the "gathered throng", is that each individual person heard that which was being said as if the "message" was being spoken by someone from their home town! WITHOUT an interpreter!

They themselves were the interpreter. Each HEARD them speaking in tongues but HEARD their own language.

 

[CharismaticLady]

The key lies in the reason why speaking in tongues originated sir, to spread the gospel. The gifts of the spirit were to diminish as the faith increased. With the death of the apostles, most gifts such as tongues and healing no longer occurred. Before the end Christians were cautioned not to use it without an interpreter. With the good news reaching the ends of the earth today, most likely God is not using them anymore to spread His message.

This is incorrect. You can't spread the gospel if they can't understand what you are saying, and "no man understands." Please read my longer post on this above #74.

 

[Pearl]

Interesting. Why do you think you can't remember what you said?

Probably because I didn't choose the words. I sometimes use words I didn't even know I knew.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Probably because I didn't choose the words. I sometimes use words I didn't even know I knew.

Amazing.