(Moved) speaking in tongues

ewq1938 · Nov 9, 2015

bbbbbbb said:
Most assuredly I believe in speaking in tongues. I do it daily. My primary tongue is English and I speak some German and a smattering of Chinese. When I was in China this past April and met with the Christians there I practiced scriptural tongues. I spoke in English and my interpreter translated into Chinese so that my audience could understand what I said.

That's what unknown tongues (foreign languages) is actually about in the bible. This concept that it's this special weird sounding language is not scriptural.

Veritas238 · Nov 10, 2015

ewq1938 said:
That's what unknown tongues (foreign languages) is actually about in the bible. This concept that it's this special weird sounding language is not scriptural.

Where exactly does that bible teach that biblical tongues are languages that someone has previously learned?

ewq1938 · Nov 10, 2015

Veritas238 said:
Where exactly does that bible teach that biblical tongues are languages that someone has previously learned?

Context is clear enough on that in most places. The exception would be cases like in Acts where someone spoke but ppl hearing heard it in various languages or in a case where someone does speak a foreign language they never knew previously but I don't see any example of that in scripture.

What is not in scripture is this supposed strange sounding language that the speaker does not know. That is never the case in scripture. Most "tongues" found in modern churches is not biblical.

Veritas238 · Nov 10, 2015

ewq1938 said:
Context is clear enough on that in most places. The exception would be cases like in Acts where someone spoke but ppl hearing heard it in various languages or in a case where someone does speak a foreign language they never knew previously but I don't see any example of that in scripture.

How can you possibly interpret biblical tongues to mean anything OTHER than a language not previously learned? Tongues is from the Holy Spirit, and when someone speaks in tongues they are speaking as the Spirit of God gives them the utterance. If tongues is a language that someone has previously learned and has knowledge of, then they do not need the Spirit of God to empower or enable to be able to do anything.

Please offer any proof that biblical tongues can or should be interpreted to mean a known earthly language.

ewq1938 · Nov 10, 2015

Veritas238 said:
How can you possibly interpret biblical tongues to mean anything OTHER than a language not previously learned?

Because in most cases an interpreter is needed to help the audience understand the message. It's what we call a translator today.

Tongues is from the Holy Spirit, and when someone speaks in tongues they are speaking as the Spirit of God gives them the utterance.

That which comes from the holy Spirit at least in scripture doesn't need an interpreter, see Acts for that.

If tongues is a language that someone has previously learned and has knowledge of, then they do not need the Spirit of God to empower or enable to be able to do anything.

That's true unless it's a case where God wants the person to speak a language they don't know but never is it a non-human language. All tongues/languages are ones spoken by people somewhere on the Earth.

Please offer any proof that biblical tongues can or should be interpreted to mean a known earthly language.

Almost any example works. This is one example:

Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 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.
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?

What there is no evidence of is it not being an earthly language.

Veritas238 · Nov 10, 2015

ewq1938 said:
Because in most cases an interpreter is needed to help the audience understand the message. It's what we call a translator today.

Interpretation is also a gift of the Holy Spirit. Regardless, the fact that an interpreter MAY be needed (depending on context and purpose of the tongues) does nothing to show that the actual tongues themselves are native to the speaker.

That which comes from the holy Spirit at least in scripture doesn't need an interpreter, see Acts for that.

Because in Acts tongues served a particular purpose, and it is not in the same context in Corinthians. Paul clearly shows one purpose for tongues in Corinthians being to address a particular group of people, and in this instance and interpreter would be needed. These tongues are not known languages to the speaker. Paul even urged that when praying in tongues, we also pray that we may interpret.

That's true unless it's a case where God wants the person to speak a language they don't know but never is it a non-human language. All tongues/languages are ones spoken by people somewhere on the Earth.

Tongues is ALWAYS speaking a language that someone doesn't know perviously.

"1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

Please tell me, if a man is speaking in tongues, and no man on Earth can understand him, then what earthly language is he speaking?

Almost any example works. This is one example:

Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 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.
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?

Actually, all of these scriptures prove my point. That tongues are languages not known previously to the speaker.

What there is no evidence of is it not being an earthly language.

Purely opinion, but also, irrelevant to the what tongues actually are and their intentions. What they are NOT are known earthly languages to the speaker.

ewq1938 · Nov 10, 2015

Veritas238 said:
Interpretation is also a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Not in Acts where the HS causes men to speak in tongues/languages.

Regardless, the fact that an interpreter MAY be needed (depending on context and purpose of the tongues) does nothing to show that the actual tongues themselves are native to the speaker.

When a person speaks English to a crowd who doesn't understand English, then a translator is needed. That is the situation in most of the examples where unknown tongues are being spoken and an interpreter is needed.

Because in Acts tongues served a particular purpose, and it is not in the same context in Corinthians. Paul clearly shows one purpose for tongues in Corinthians being to address a particular group of people, and in this instance and interpreter would be needed. These tongues are not known languages to the speaker. Paul even urged that when praying in tongues, we also pray that we may interpret.

When an interpreter is needed then the speaking always know what they are saying. It's the audience that doesn't

Tongues is ALWAYS speaking a language that someone doesn't know perviously.

Not in scripture. In scripture either they know the language and the audience does not, or the HS is involvd and the audience is able to understand as if spoken in their own language. That is the only case in scripture where the speaker didn't know the languages it was received in.

"1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

Please tell me, if a man is speaking in tongues, and no man on Earth can understand him, then what earthly language is he speaking?

One that the audience doesn't know. God understands because he understands any language. In this case the speaker knows the language he is speaking but does not know the language of his audience.

Actually, all of these scriptures prove my point. That tongues are languages not known previously to the speaker.

Yet no interpreter is needed as in the case with speaking a language others do not know. When the HS inspires one to speak, no translator is needed.

Purely opinion, but also, irrelevant to the what tongues actually are and their intentions. What they are NOT are known earthly languages to the speaker.

That's wrong in most cases. You don't offer proof that anyone speaks a non-human language because there is none. It's a doctrine of man without scriptural support.

Veritas238 · Nov 10, 2015

ewq1938 said:
Not in Acts where the HS causes men to speak in tongues/languages.

Regardless of if interpretation is present in Acts, it is still a gift that Paul says is given by the Holy Spirit. The reason we do not see interpretation of the tongues in Acts is because in Acts we do not see the GIFT of tongues. In Acts we see the gift of the Holy Spirit being given and tongues being the manifestation of this gift of the Spirit. The tongues is what let others know that the Holy Spirit was given. This is why the tongues in Acts are not the gift of tongues that Paul spoke of in Acts.

When a person speaks English to a crowd who doesn't understand English, then a translator is needed. That is the situation in most of the examples where unknown tongues are being spoken and an interpreter is needed.

But this is not the gift of tongues or the gift of interpretation. If you speak to a bunch of people who don't speak English and then someone who speaks english and their native language interprets for you, then you are not speaking in biblical tongues and the person is not exercising the biblical gift of interpretation.

This is not the issue in Corinthians when an interpreter is needed, because the tongues that are originally being spoken are not known to the native speaker, nor to the interpreter. It is as the Holy Spirit gives utterance, not as man gives utterance.

When an interpreter is needed then the speaking always know what they are saying. It's the audience that doesn't

When speaking of the gift of tongues this is most likely true, but the interpreter does not need to necessarily have prior knowledge of the tongues that he is interpreting.

Not in scripture. In scripture either they know the language and the audience does not, or the HS is involvd and the audience is able to understand as if spoken in their own language. That is the only case in scripture where the speaker didn't know the languages it was received in.

If they know the language previously then they are not speaking in tongues! If the HS lets them hear in their native language then this is not interpretation either.

One that the audience doesn't know. God understands because he understands any language. In this case the speaker knows the language he is speaking but does not know the language of his audience.

You aren't answering the question. The definition of tongues biblically is a language that is foreign to the speaker. I am fluent in Spanish and in English. If I speak in Spanish, regardless of if the hearers know Spanish or not, I am NOT speaking in tongues because God does not need to empower me to speak that language. So, I want to ask you again. Ff someone is speaking in tongues (a language that someone does not know) and no man understands Him, then what language is he speaking? If a man is praying unto God, then the audience doesn't hear him. If they do hear them, it doesn't matter because the tongue is not for them, it is for God. So if I am praying in tongues and language that no man can understand, how can you say that language that I am speaking is earthly?

Yet no interpreter is needed as in the case with speaking a language others do not know. When the HS inspires one to speak, no translator is needed.

No translator is needed only when that person is praying to God, or when the intended recipients of that message do not speak that native language and the tongue is in their language. An interpreter is needed if the tongue that is spoken to an intended group of people is not naturally understood by them. In this instance the interpreter does not need to understand what language is being spoke, as God will empower him to understand that tongue. [/quote]

That's wrong in most cases.

You have provided no evidence of such, and also have not explained 1 Corinthians 14:2.

ewq1938 · Nov 10, 2015

Veritas238 said:
Regardless of if interpretation is present in Acts, it is still a gift that Paul says is given by the Holy Spirit. The reason we do not see interpretation of the tongues in Acts is because in Acts we do not see the GIFT of tongues.

It was a gift in Acts. Anything given is a gift.

But this is not the gift of tongues or the gift of interpretation. If you speak to a bunch of people who don't speak English and then someone who speaks english and their native language interprets for you, then you are not speaking in biblical tongues and the person is not exercising the biblical gift of interpretation.

None of that is true. Interpreting a human language can be a gift. And this is an example of "biblical tongues"

This is not the issue in Corinthians when an interpreter is needed, because the tongues that are originally being spoken are not known to the native speaker, nor to the interpreter.

the language spoke is known by both but unknown to the audience which is why it's call an unknown language.

When speaking of the gift of tongues this is most likely true, but the interpreter does not need to necessarily have prior knowledge of the tongues that he is interpreting.

I know of no scriptural case where that is true.

If they know the language previously then they are not speaking in tongues!

Any language spoken is tongues being spoken. It's the same word.

You aren't answering the question. The definition of tongues biblically is a language that is foreign to the speaker.v

That's not true. In context it is unknown to the audience.

So if I am praying in tongues and language that no man can understand, how can you say that language that I am speaking is earthly?

Click to expand...

Because it is no man in the audience that can understand in context. The person speaking always knows what they are saying.

You have provided no evidence of such, and also have not explained 1 Corinthians 14:2.

Click to expand...

I did explain that verse already.

Veritas238 · Nov 10, 2015

ewq1938 said:
It was a gift in Acts. Anything given is a gift.

Paul shows the purpose of tongues in Corinthians to be 2 fold.
1. In order to give a message directly from God to a group of people, in which case it is equated with the gift of prophesy.
2. As a way to edify the Spirit of a believer through prayer, in which case the tongues do not need to be interpreted.

Neither of these two scenarios are shown in acts. But what we do see in acts is that tongues was manifested as the initial sign of someone receiving the Holy Spirit. We see this explicitly stated in two locations, in Acts 10:45-46 and also Acts 2. No where in acts do we see an interpreter being used, because this was not the purpose of tongues in Acts.

None of that is true. Interpreting a human language can be a gift. And this is an example of "biblical tongues"

All of it is true. It can be a gift, but it is not a gift if the interpreter of the tongues already knows the language. This is not biblical. If it is, please show it.

the language spoke is known by both but unknown to the audience which is why it's call an unknown language.

Once again, this is not tongues, nor is it why the bible calls them unknown tongues in English or in the Greek. Tongues always refers to the speaker, not the hearer. If i speak in English, I am not speaking in tongues. The spirit does not have to give me utterance to speak English. That is the most important part, which the bible defines as the operation behind the tongues.... as the Spirit gives the utterance. If the Spirit does not give utterance then it aint tongues. If I speak in english to people who speak English or don't speak english, it aint tongues.

I know of no scriptural case where that is true.

Where do we have a scriptural case of someone speaking in tongues and then someone else interpreting? We do not have an example of this happening, yet we know that it happens because Paul taught on the subject. Where we disagree is what tongues actually are. For example, you believe that since you speak English, you could speak to a group of German people that do not speak English, and you would be speaking in tongues. This is not the case. Until we agree on this fundamental problem, then tackling the idea of spiritual gift of interoperation is going to be fruitless.

Tongues is more than simple speaking another language, it is speaking as the Spirit gives the utterance, every time.

Any language spoken is tongues being spoken. It's the same word.

Once again, you misunderstand what empowers someone to speaking in tongues. Just because I speak in English, I am not utilizing the GIFT of tongues, because the GIFT of tongues per the bible is as the spirit of God giving the person utterance. Every example of tongues that we have in the bible is the speaker speaking a language that they had known previously. If this is not the case, please show an example of such.

swordsman1 · Nov 11, 2015

Veritas238 said:
Where I would disagree is that all tongues are known earthly languages. I believe Paul makes the case for such a thing as a heavenly language. What that sounds like, its hard telling.

Where exactly does Paul make a case for a heavenly language? The only description of tongues I can see is Acts 2:4-11 and it goes into great detail to describe exactly what it is. It is most definitely earthly human languages. In the absence of any other description of tongues we must conclude that tongues throughout the NT is always human languages.

ewq1938 · Nov 11, 2015

Veritas238 said:
Paul shows the purpose of tongues in Corinthians to be 2 fold.
1. In order to give a message directly from God to a group of people, in which case it is equated with the gift of prophesy.

Same as in Acts.

2. As a way to edify the Spirit of a believer through prayer, in which case the tongues do not need to be interpreted.

A language only needs to be interpreted if someone is intended to understand it but doesn't know the language someone else is speaking.

Neither of these two scenarios are shown in acts.

The first is. The second isn't simply because it was n't about praying in Acts.

No where in acts do we see an interpreter being used, because this was not the purpose of tongues in Acts.

That's because the language the HS gives is always understood by anyone no matter what language they know or don't know.

All of it is true. It can be a gift, but it is not a gift if the interpreter of the tongues already knows the language. This is not biblical. If it is, please show it.

Obviously someone can know a language but not be great at interpreting the message to someone else as a gifted interpreter can. I'll use poetry as example. Just translating word for word won't bring out the special nuances in a poem but a translator who has a special gift, even God given gift will be able to bring forth the fullness of the poem in the new language.

Once again, this is not tongues, nor is it why the bible calls them unknown tongues in English or in the Greek. Tongues always refers to the speaker, not the hearer.

No, it's related to both. One speaks, one hears. If a speaker speaks in a language unknown by the audience a translator is needed. Never is the language unknown by the speaker. Only one time does Paul even mention someone praying in a language they don't know and he is negative about it because it is foolish to do.

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
1Co 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.

One should only pray if they understand what they are praying!

If i speak in English, I am not speaking in tongues.

It is a tongue. There is no such thing as this magical "unknown language" that only God knows. That's a horrible and very old misinterpretation of what tongues/languages are in scripture.

The spirit does not have to give me utterance to speak English.

It does when it wishes to speak through you and allow anyone to understand you even if they don't understand English.

[/QUOTE]That is the most important part, which the bible defines as the operation behind the tongues.... as the Spirit gives the utterance. [/QUOTE]

That exact situation happened in Acts yet it is quite different than the situation you describe when the spirit gives an utterance.

Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The only place in scripture where it states the spirit gave someone utterance.

If the Spirit does not give utterance then it aint tongues. If I speak in english to people who speak English or don't speak english, it aint tongues.

Incorrect.

Where we disagree is what tongues actually are. For example, you believe that since you speak English, you could speak to a group of German people that do not speak English, and you would be speaking in tongues. This is not the case. Until we agree on this fundamental problem, then tackling the idea of spiritual gift of interoperation is going to be fruitless.

Tongues is more than simple speaking another language, it is speaking as the Spirit gives the utterance, every time.

No, not every time. In fact I only find one reference and it doesn't match what you claim speaking in tongues is.

Every example of tongues that we have in the bible is the speaker speaking a language that they had known previously. If this is not the case, please show an example of such.

The above is what I believe not what you believe. There is no scriptural example of someone speaking in a language they didn't know except one place about praying to God but not knowing what you are saying and Paul speaks against it.

ewq1938 · Nov 11, 2015

swordsman1 said:
Where exactly does Paul make a case for a heavenly language? The only description of tongues I can see is Acts 2:4-11 and it goes into great detail to describe exactly what it is. It is most definitely earthly human languages. In the absence of any other description of tongues we must conclude that tongues throughout the NT is always human languages.

Amen. Tongues is another word for languages. All languages are Earthly.

tturt · Jun 7, 2016

Think you're saying Paul's against speaking in tongues because it's not serving with "The one who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but the one who prophesies edifies the church." I Cor 14:4

Yes, spiritual gifts are to serve including the one speaking in tongues "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the good of all." I Cor 12:7

Paul also said for church:
"Now I would like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater · than the one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets so that the church may receive edification." I Cor 14:5

"I thank God I speak in tongues more than all of you;" I Cor 14:18 (believers' edification).

Some purposes for tongues are to magnify G_d (Acts 10:46), self edification (I Cor 14:4) church edification ( I Cor 14:27-28); builds up our faith and keep ourselves in the love of God (Jude 1: 20-21); can pray in The Spirit (I Cor 14:14; Ephesians 6:18; Rom 8:26-27; 1 Corinthians 14:4,15) and they're a sign TO unbelievers OF believers (I Cor 14:22 and Mark 16:17)

Biblicist · Jun 7, 2016

I wonder how I missed this post!!

tturt said:
Some purposes for tongues are to magnify G_d (Acts 10:10), self edification (I Cor 14:4) church edification ( I Cor 14:27-28); builds up our faith and keep ourselves in the love of God (Jude 1: 20-21); can pray in The Spirit (I Cor 14:14; Ephesians 6:18; Rom 8:26-27; 1 Corinthians 14:4,15) and they're a sign TO unbelievers OF believers (I Cor 14:22 and Mark 16:17)

This is a great list of why it is so important to allow the Holy Spirit to pray through us to the Father, both during times of personal prayer and within the setting of the congregation.

About the only qualification that I would offer is with 1Cor 14:22 with regard to the sign value of tongues, where Paul is pointing to verse 21 where he is connecting the unknown tongues of the Assyrian invaders who had invaded Jerusalem, where the inhabitants were confused by the commands that they could not understand. Paul is reminding us that the same thing can occur within the setting of a congregation when many within the meeting will simultaneously praise God in the Holy Spirit, as this will only serve to confuse both the unsaved and cessationist visitors as they do not understand the things of the Spirit; where this activity of the Spirit will more often than not unintentionally become a negative sign that can very easily harden them.

So when the passage is talking about the sign value of tongues, it is not that tongues are intended as a sign to either the saved or unsaved, but when we improperly allow all to pray and sing in the Spirit with words of praise to the Father, that it will have an unintended negative effect on both the unsaved and the cessationist visitor which is why we are to only permit three words of praise to the Father in tongues and that each must be interpreted/articulated.

swordsman1 · Jun 7, 2016

Biblicist said:
About the only qualification that I would offer is with 1Cor 14:22 with regard to the sign value of tongues, where Paul is pointing to verse 21 where he is connecting the unknown tongues of the Assyrian invaders who had invaded Jerusalem, where the inhabitants were confused by the commands that they could not understand. Paul is reminding us that the same thing can occur within the setting of a congregation when many within the meeting will simultaneously praise God in the Holy Spirit, as this will only serve to confuse both the unsaved and cessationist visitors as they do not understand the things of the Spirit; where this activity of the Spirit will more often than not unintentionally become a negative sign that can very easily harden them.

So when the passage is talking about the sign value of tongues, it is not that tongues are intended as a sign to either the saved or unsaved, but when we improperly allow all to pray and sing in the Spirit with words of praise to the Father, that it will have an unintended negative effect on both the unsaved and the cessationist visitor which is why we are to only permit three words of praise to the Father in tongues and that each must be interpreted/articulated.

1 Cor 14:21-22 "In the Law it is written: “With other tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers"

The thing to notice about this passage is that Paul links Isaiah's prophecy about foreign languages spoken in Israel to tongues speaking in Corinth. Proof if any was needed that the tongues in Corinth was foreign human languages, and not a heavenly or angelic language as some people unjustifiably claim. There is only one description of the gift of tongues in the bible Acts 2:4-11 and nowhere is it redefined as anything else.

tturt · Jun 8, 2016

In reference to serving others as the purpose of tongues "But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life." Jude v 20-21.

One result is to serve.

FredVB · Jun 18, 2016

Tongues is indeed miraculous, if that is how you want to word it. It is miraculous because it is, "as the Spirit gives utterance." Where I would disagree is that all tongues are known earthly languages. I believe Paul makes the case for such a thing as a heavenly language. What that sounds like, its hard telling.

There can be that interpretation, yet a look at the passage in 1Corinthians 13, in which Paul was saying, "If I speak with the languages of men and of angels, but don't have love, I have become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal", can show the subject matter is really on love that might be not shown adequately, and what is said of the gift of tongues is said hypothetically, as what is meant in this is that no matter what is done, anything whatever, it won't be of significant meaning without love. Certainly in church what any are speaking to others should not be distraction from the emphasis of the gospel of salvation in Christ that should be there. As that could be all of what is meant in that passage, there isn't doctrinal basis to establish that angels have a language of their own, and the sure description of what the clearly miraculous gift of tongues is will be just what is said of it where it is introduced in Acts 2, and being that it would not be confused with what the pagans and the those in cults engaged in with their lives ecstatic speech.

Biblicist · Jun 19, 2016

Paul leaves absolutely no doubt that when we pray in the Spirit (tongues), that the Holy Spirit will always be speaking to the Father and that he will do so within inarticulate or Angelic tongues as per 1Cor 13:1. When we view Paul’s writings we see that he realises that when we pray in the Spirit that no man will ever be able to understand what is being said and that the Spirits intercessory prayer and praise will always be directed toward the Father (1Cor 14:2).

1Cor 14:2 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.

The following chart should help to show the differences between how the 120 were praising God in the Holy Spirit, with how praying in the Spirit (tongues)

Tongues - Comparing Acts 2 with 1Cor 14.png

tturt · Jun 19, 2016

For there to be the false, there has to be the authentic. It depends on the source and the purpose.

(Moved) speaking in tongues

I love you three.

Member

I love you three.

Member

I love you three.

Member

I love you three.

Member

I love you three.

Member

Well-Known Member

I love you three.

I love you three.

Senior Veteran

Full Gospel believer

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Full Gospel believer

Senior Veteran

Similar threads