How do the gifts of the Holy Spirit build up the Church?

[tturt]

We differ in our opinions and interpretations but that's the way things are.

 

[Biblicist]

We differ in our opinions and interpretations but that's the way things are.

That's one of the benefits of this site in that it enables various views to be presented.

 

[tturt]

so true - still sisters and brothers in Yeshua.

 

[quietbloke]

All the 9 spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit are supernatural in character and are given to build up the body of Christ the Church so that we can bless those who are believers and witness to those who are not.

 

[tturt]

Have a question - in relationship to the tongues with interpretation. I've read that it's not a word for word interpretation but overall thoughts that are given. To me, that's not a big deal but for others it is.

 

[Biblicist]

Have a question - in relationship to the tongues with interpretation. I've read that it's not a word for word interpretation but overall thoughts that are given. To me, that's not a big deal but for others it is.

There has been a trend over recent years within the better commentaries to employ our English articulation instead of interpretation for the Greek hermēneia which is something that Gordon Fee pointed out in his book on First Corinthians back in 1987. This has been taken up by numerous commentators since this time where I have even started to use the dual expression "interpretation/articulation" as it does seem to be a bit hard to believe that mere man, even when empowered by the Holy Spirit, that we could faithfully translate word for word what the Spirit is saying to the Father.

Is it possible to faithfully translate an angelic tongue word for word into a human language?

 

[quietbloke]

Interpretation of tongues that are given in public are not a translation of the language but an interpretation. God speaks through the mind and personality of the interpreter. It is not a word for word translation.

 

[Biblicist]

Interpretation of tongues that are given in public are not a translation of the language but an interpretation. God speaks through the mind and personality of the interpreter. It is not a word for word translation.

When we use our English interpretation it does tend to imply a word for word, or at least a near word for word translation of what was said in the original donor language. The newer 'buzz' word of articulation suggests that what we are hearing (via an articulation) is not so much a formal equivalence translation but something that follows along the lines of something that is similar to a very loose dynamic equivalence wording, similar to say the Amplified Bible or maybe even something that is a bit more loosley worded than the Amplified.

 

[quietbloke]

The Church in Corinth in 1 Corinthians sometimes used the spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit for their own personal edification,rather than building up the Church. Paul corrects them on this and also corrects all who use the gifts of the Spirit. We are to edify others. Firstly the Church but also to reach out to unbelievers.

 

[Biblicist]

The Church in Corinth in 1 Corinthians sometimes used the spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit for their own personal edification,rather than building up the Church. Paul corrects them on this and also corrects all who use the gifts of the Spirit. We are to edify others. Firstly the Church but also to reach out to unbelievers.

When it comes to our ability to pray to the Father in the Spirit (tongues), as this is the one Operation of the Spirit that is designed to strengthen the individual believer, where it has no value for the congregation, it can be very easy for us to misuse this ability where we focus on ourselves and not the congregation. I know that I enjoy being able to sing in the Spirit (to myself) during times of corporate praise and worship, so I understand why so many are content to improperly loudly vocalise their praise to the Father without their words being subsequently interpreted-articulated during these times.

When we both look at and concur with Paul's strong criticism of the Corinthian practice where they allowed everyone to pray/sing in the Spirit during times of praise (without these tongues being articulated), as many Pentecostal congregations still encourage this practice, then our criticism of the Corinthians seems to be a bit strange as we are in fact criticising ourselves - but this criticism is undoubtedly well deserved.

 

[quietbloke]

quietbloke writes,'All of the 9 spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit mentioned in 1 Cor.12 are for the good of the congregation. When we speak in tongues privately no interpretation is necessary. When a public utterance in tongues is given an interpretation is required so 'that the Church may be edified. Bible teacher David Petts wrote in his book,'Body Builders - Gifts to make God's People grow','But what form will that edification take? It has for a long time been assumed by many that the interpretation of tongues is equal to prophecy on the grounds that both prophecy and interpretation edify the Church (cf.1 Corinthians 14:4-5) Accordingly it is believed that interpretation must take the form of a prophecy with the result that in many churches the interpretation of tongues always sounds exactly like a prophecy. On the other hand others have argued that,if tongues is a form of prayer or praise (e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:14ff) then interpretation should not sound like a prophecy but should reflect the nature of the tongue,whether prayer or praise This view is strongly backed up by Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians that anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but God. From this it certainly appears that the interpretation of tongues should take the form of praise or prayer rather than prophecy. Indeed,the fact that both prophecy and interpretation edify the Church (v.4-5) by no means implies that they must take the same form. What Paul clearly states in 1 Corinthians 14:5 is not that tongues with interpretation is equal to prophecy,but that the value of tongues with interpretation is equal to prophecy,for both edify the Church. But that is not to say that all interpretation must take the form of prophecy,for the gift may be used to edify the Church in a very different way.(It is interesting to note that in traditional Pentecostal circles the 'prophetic' form of interpretation is normal,whereas in the 'charismatic' meetings of the neo-pentecostals the gift is frequently exercised as praise. There are,of course,exceptions to this). That there has been some disagreement on this matter over a period of many years is evident in that as early as 1934 Horton felt it necessary to deal with the subject at some length (See Horton,op.CIT,pp.174-176).It is not my intention,however,to take sides in this matter. I agree that a correct understanding of the nature of the gift of interpretation will depend upon a correct understanding of the nature of the gift of tongues. However despite 1 Corinthians 14:2,it is by no means clear that tongues is always addressed to God. It is certainly true that verses such as Acts 2:11;10:46; 1 Corinthians 14:16 and especially 1 Corinthians 14:2 seem to give the impression that speaking in tongues is essentially 'to God' But all that these verses actually show is that speaking with tongues may take the form of praising,magnifying or blessing God. They do not demonstrate that it must do so. Even 1 Corinthians 14:2 when taken in its' context,does not conclusively demonstrate that tongues is essentially 'to God'. The reason that speaking in tongues is said to be 'not to man' is given in the self same verse. It is because no one understands it (The NIV translation is unfortunate here. It puts a full-stop after 'God' and begins the next sentence,'Indeed...' However the Greek conjunction gar usually means 'for' rather than 'indeed'. What the verse is actually saying then,is that speaking in tongues is not to man but to God because no one but God understands it (Situations like the day of Pentecost would clearly be an exception to this) Paul is not making a blanket statement here to cover all utterances in tongues. He is saying that tongues without interpretation must be to God,because without interpretation nobody can understand it. But this by no means implies that with interpretation tongues cannot be the vehicle of a message from God to man. 'Indeed in the same verse Paul goes on to say that the speaker in tongues is speaking with 'mysteries' with his Spirit. What is important about this is the fact that when this word is used elsewhere in Paul's writings it signifys a secret made known by God to man through His Spirit (e.g. Ephesians 3:4-5). Furthermore,1 Corinthians 14:28 could well be taken to imply that if in the absence of an interpreter the speaker in tongues must speak quietly to himself and to God.then in the presence of an interpreter,his audible utterance might well be to man when interpreted. It is also noteworthy that in v. 21 Paul refers to God using another tongue to speak 'to this people'. Finally,it is interesting that prophecy is described in v.3 prophecy 'to men',yet can on occasion be 'to the Lord' (cf Numbers 11:24ff);1 Chronicles 25:3) It could well be argued therefore,that conversely,tongues which without interpretation is of necessity 'to God' (v.2) may also be sometimes'to men',especially when it is interpreted. In short,speaking with tongues is the ability to speak supernatually a language we have never learned. The direction of that speaking (whether to God or to man) is not an essential part of the nature of the gift. As outlined above,the Scriptures indicate that tongues may be in either direction. The interpretation of those tongues may,therefore,be either God-ward or man-ward. It would be quite wrong to suggest that the interpretation of tongues should never sound like a prophecy (to man) It would be equally wrong to teach that that it should never sound like praise (to God) There is certainly no scriptural warrant whatsoever for the practice,current in some circles,of saying that an utterance in tongues requires no interpretation on the grounds that it is 'only praise'. As far as Paul was concerned all public utterances in tongues required interpreting that the Church might be edified and how wonderfully edifying an inspired utterance of praise can be!'[/QUOTE]

 

[tturt]

Also, it seems believers have to willing to speak in tongues in order to do so, imo. This is based on the groups that received tongues in Scripture. It states "all" that were there received (Acts 2:4; 4:31; 10:44; 19:2) with one exception - on the Day of Pentecost, not in the Upper Room, where there were mockers of tongues (Acts 2:13). Though I do know of a one situation when the prayer was - use me anyway you see fit. Surprisingly, to them, they spoke in tongues.

I Cor 14:1 says to desire the spiritual gifts yet many times others will issue a caution if that desire is expressed.

 

[quietbloke]

Also, it seems believers have to willing to speak in tongues in order to do so, imo. This is based on the groups that received tongues in Scripture. It states "all" that were there received (Acts 2:4; 4:31; 10:44; 19:2) with one exception - on the Day of Pentecost, not in the Upper Room, where there were mockers of tongues (Acts 2:13). Though I do know of a one situation when the prayer was - use me anyway you see fit. Surprisingly, to them, they spoke in tongues.

I Cor 14:1 says to desire the spiritual gifts yet many times others will issue a caution if that desire is expressed.

That's very true 'tturt'