Is Speaking In Tongues Biblical Today?

[rrobsr]

1 Cor 13:1-3 "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing."

Paul uses five conditional IF statements in 1 Cor 13:1-3 which were both hypothetical (they were imagined scenarios, not things he actually did) AND hyperbole (the imagined scenarios were wildly exaggerated examples of each gift) - to make the point that even having spiritual gifts to the highest conceivable degree would be worthless without love:
- tongues, even to the degree of speaking the language of angels...
- the gift of prophecy even to the degree of knowing ALL mysteries and ALL knowledge (ie becoming omniscient)...
- the gift of faith even to the degree of removing mountains...
- the gift of giving even to the degree of giving up ALL your possessions...
- and even giving up your own life...

....would all be to no avail without love.

None of those exaggerated hypothetical examples represent the normal operation of those gifts. Paul is saying that even if someone had the gift of tongues to such an exalted degree that they spoke in the language of angels, but didn't have love, it would be worthless to them.

Though (the same word or concept used in the verses to which you referred) you wrote this reply doesn't mean you actually wrote it? You just hypothetically wrote it? Something doesn't add up there.

 

[swordsman1]

I do at different times in my walk operate one or more of the nine manifestations. I find it helpful to get information from God about something which is not possible to get via my 5 senses (word of knowledge). I also get information from God as to what to do with that information (word of wisdom). I've been known to detect devil spirits in certain people (discerning of spirits). I've healed people (healing). I've seen things occur that helped me or others that wouldn't normally happen (miracles). I speak in tongues in my private prayer life throughout each day (tongues) to edify myself. I've interpreted tongues (interpretation of tongues) as well as prophesied (prophecy) in the church to edify others.

Let me ask you this: am I somehow being tricked by the adversary?

How did you receive your prophecy and words of knowledge? Having a strong feeling or impression is not the method of revelation described in scripture.

By healing people do you mean you've prayed for people to be healed and they have been? Great, so have I. But that is not the gift of healing described in the New Testament when the disciples healed by a touch or a command, and the healings were an instantaneous and 100% complete cure of permanent disabilities such as blindness. There was no praying involved - if we have to pray it proves we don't have the gift of healing.

 

[rrobsr]

To Major1:

Getting off topic for a minute, it sure looks like God has blessed you with a wonderful family. Always a good thing. I'm glad for you.

 

[rrobsr]

How did you receive your prophecy and words of knowledge? Having a strong feeling or impression is not the method of revelation described in scripture.

By healing people do you mean you've prayed for people to be healed and they have been? Great, so have I. But that is not the gift of healing described in the New Testament when the disciples healed by a touch or a command, and the healings were an instantaneous and 100% complete cure of permanent disabilities such as blindness. There was no praying involved - if we have to pray it proves we don't have the gift of healing.

God tells his spirit (the gift) he gave me when I was born again and that spirit tells my mind. Is there more to it?

 

[DamianWarS]

Other sources say differently:

www.dictionary.com/browse/homonym
Phonetics. a word pronounced the same as another but differing in meaning, whether spelled the same way or not, as heir and air; a homophone (def 1).

dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/homonym
a word that sounds the same or is spelled the same as another word but has a different meaning

www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/homonym
A homonym can be a word that sounds the same as something else — like by (“near”) and buy (“purchase”) — or it can be spelled exactly the same way and pronounced differently — like minute (unit of time) and minute (“tiny”).

www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/homonym
a word that is spelled the same or sounds the same as another word but has a different meaning

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/homonym
(semantics, strict sense) A word that both sounds and is spelled the same as another word but has a different meaning.

www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/homonym
a word that is spelled and pronounced like another word but is different in meaning

www.wordreference.com/definition/homonym
a word that is the same as another in sound and spelling but different in meaning, such as bear "to carry '' and bear "large, brown or black furry animal.''

www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/homonym
A homonym is a word that has the same sound or spelling as another but a different meaning.

www.glossary.sil.org/term/homonym
A word that has the same pronunciation as another. Homonyms differ from each other in:
meaning
origin
usually spelling


In the definition you have quoted I don't think it is saying that homonyms are 2 different words but rather 2 examples of the word, hence the plurality. If "ball" was 2 different words it would have 2 seperate dictionary entries.

With teleios the word can be mean perfect, complete or mature, with the context determining the correct meaning. For instance Heb 5:13-14 reads:

For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature [teleios], who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.​

Here the meaning is clearly 'mature', as Paul making a contrast with an infant, and virtually every bible version translates it as such. Using 'perfect' here wouldn't make sense. So the context of 1 Cor 13:10 must also determine the meaning of the word there, and 'completeness' in my view is a far better fit than 'perfect' for the reasons I outlined earlier.

well you don't have to believe me but words with different meanings are different words... your examples all show that "... a word pronounced the same as another..." what exactly do you think "as another" refers to?

often different words can be use while translating, this doesn't mean the original word has different meanings it means the original meaning is not mirrored in english in one word.

 

[DamianWarS]

Why is it irresponsible to say 'completeness' is the completion of the canon, if that is the correct meaning? It certainly makes more sense to the context than calling it the 2nd coming in my view.

because "the completion of the canon" is unsupported in scripture. This passage is too obscure to conclusively say it points to "the completion of the canon" and since it is such an important feature as it has an impact on doctrine it should be confirmed elsewhere to be responsible rather than present an idea that is unknown to the rest of scripture and is controversial itself in your interpretation. Early church views of this passage maintained it was when we were joined with Christ, either by his 2nd coming or through death.

 

[DamianWarS]

I would agree with you except as I have said several times, the original Greek grammar will not allow that interpretation.

The grammer of "perfect one" is neuter which means that the subject must be a THING and not a person or an event to come.

this shows a lack of understanding with the greek for multiple reasons. to start most "things" aren't neuter. For example all these words in greek are not neuter

• law [nomos] - masculine
• scripture [graphe] - feminine
• canon [kanon] - masculine
• book [biblos (where we get out word "bible" from]- feminine
• prophecy [propheteia] - feminine
• revelation [apokalypsis] - feminine
• age (as in an amount of time) [aion] - masculine
• period (as in an amount of time) [chronos] - masculine

the word is an adjective, it is nominative without a head noun and as such it acts as the noun, because it is neuter this points to it being an abstract which does not directly point to a neuter noun but can represent something else be it masculine, feminine or neuter because it is an abstract. a more abstract of "perfect" in english would be "perfection", a more abstract of "complete" would be "completeness"

let's look at another verse in the bible with abstracts being used:

Phil 4:8
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable... all these words are adjectives, all of them are nominal case and all of them are neuter gender and all them do not have a head noun just like "the perfect". By your logic this can only point to "things". In reality they are all abstracts and can point to anything.

 

[tdidymas]

There are two views with regard to the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

1. The Soteriological understanding

The traditional view is that every Believer receives the Baptism in the Holy Spirit the moment that they are Born Again (irrespective if they speak in tongues or not), this is the view of those who are Evangelical, the vast majority of contemporary Charismatics and non-classic Pentecostals such as me.

For a Pentecostal such as myself, even though I acknowledge that every Christian has been Baptised in the Holy Spirit even if they choose not to speak in tongues; what makes me a Pentecostal and not a Charismatic is that I still believe that the normative Biblical pattern for Salvation is that every Believer should expect to immediately speak in tongues.

Soteriology speaks of our initial Salvation or of salvation in general.​

2. The Subsequence understanding

The classic-Pentecostal view (such as with the AoG) is that the Believer initially receives the Holy Spirit as a seal and sometime later, maybe minutes, days or years they then receive the Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

During the worldwide Charismatic Renewal of the 1960's and 70's the vast majority of Charismatics believed that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was once of subsequence, but since this time the majority view among Charismatics is that it is Soteriological. Even many AoG members are not as confident as they once were with this particular understanding.​

When Paul says that not everyone will speak in tongues he is referring to the congregational setting where many will choose not to speak in tongues but instead prophesy or maybe do neither.

Every Born Again believer can certainly pray in the Spirit (speak in tongues) as we are each filled or Baptised in the Holy Spirit. There is nothing natural about our ability to allow the Holy Spirit to pray in an Angelic tongue to the Father.

Tks for the lesson.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

When we pray in the Spirit the Holy Spirit always prays perfect prayers that are way above our human comprehension and even with our own ability to pray with the mind.

When it comes to times of personal praise, irrespective if we are in our prayer closet or even driving our car, the ability to allow the Holy Spirit to speak words of continuous praise to the Father, either as simple words or in song is a spiritual ability that goes way beyond the abilities of mortal man.

All this is your traditional Pentecostal bias. I prefer not to wrangle with you about it, so I'll cut to the chase and request you to prove that your "tongue" is a real language, that is, if you are not afraid of accountability
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-biblical-today.8024007/page-21#post-71694733
TD

 

[tdidymas]

I'm not accountable to you. And I'm not going to jump through all your hoops. 1 Corinthians 14:38.

Just what I figured.
TD

 

[1stcenturylady]

Where does it say that the gifts would be removed from the other six churches?

It doesn't need to. After Smyrna you can see the problems.

 

[1stcenturylady]

So now we have 3 types of apostle, 3 types of prophet, 3 types of teacher - the 1 Cor 12 types, the Rom 12 types, and the Eph 4 types? You seem to want to arbitrarily and without warrant divide each gift into all sorts of different types in order to suit your agenda when the bible makes no such distinction. I've already disproved your theory that there is a distinction between tongues FROM God and TO God. I am still waiting for your response on that one.

You are mistaken. You haven't proven anything except in your own mind. LOL

And which do you believe? To or From?

 

[1stcenturylady]

So now we have 3 types of apostle, 3 types of prophet, 3 types of teacher - the 1 Cor 12 types, the Rom 12 types, and the Eph 4 types? You seem to want to arbitrarily and without warrant divide each gift into all sorts of different types in order to suit your agenda when the bible makes no such distinction. I've already disproved your theory that there is a distinction between tongues FROM God and TO God. I am still waiting for your response on that one.

You are mistaken. You haven't proven anything except in your own mind. LOL

And which do you believe? To or From?

Just what I figured.
TD

You wanted me to build a website, just for you. Get real! If you think you won something, congratulations.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Exactly, we agree.

 

[1stcenturylady]

You said...............
"Never once in all those years did I see one prayer answered."

I am sorry to hear that sister. I have had my prayers answered YES and I have had some answered NO.
We prayed for our little grandson to survive but God said NO and took him home to be with him.
We prayed for my mother in law to survive her fight with cancer, but again God said NO and took her home.

Some of my prayers have yet to be answered so I wait and continue to speak with the Lord.

Tell me about a prayer that was answered, yes. I love to hear these testimonies. I'll share some of mine too for you.

 

[1stcenturylady]

That is not the point. You asked for examples of God not answering prayers and saying NO. Then you try to explain away those very examples found in the Scriptures.

God always listens to the prayers of the saints but He does not always answer Yes to those prayers as I demonstrated for you in those verses.

May I ask you with all due respect, Are you just ignoring those Scriptures or are you rejecting them because they are not what you wanted to hear?

I didn't ignore them. Don't you realize I actually used one because it proved my point, not yours. It wasn't a "no." But He doesn't listen to prayers that are not His will. That is the same as 1 John 5:14-15.

Did you ignore what I said?

 

[1stcenturylady]

Because the 2nd Coming of Christ is an event and NOT a "thing". The grammar of the Greek in which it is written does not allow for an "event" or a person. We can debate this back and forth but the grammar is not open for interpretation my dear brother.

1) Obviously the word "NOW" in the original Greek is in the present tense for Paul. IMO Paul is saying that as we are alive today speaks to everyone who is alive......"NOW", the living. Both in Paul's day as well as ours.

2) "Then" would of course mean when we die and go to heaven THEN we will have the fuller revelations in heaven.

Is the new heaven and new earth things? Yes, they are. And there we will see Jesus face to face. No where in 1 Cor. 13 does Paul mention his letters as, the perfect.

 

[1stcenturylady]

How did you receive your prophecy and words of knowledge? Having a strong feeling or impression is not the method of revelation described in scripture.

By healing people do you mean you've prayed for people to be healed and they have been? Great, so have I. But that is not the gift of healing described in the New Testament when the disciples healed by a touch or a command, and the healings were an instantaneous and 100% complete cure of permanent disabilities such as blindness. There was no praying involved - if we have to pray it proves we don't have the gift of healing.

The other night when I went to a healing service, the healer just laid hands on me and commanded different things to come into place in Jesus name, and I was healed.

 

[DamianWarS]

I personally have never witnessed tongues being spoken in a Biblical manner.

Almost every example I can give is when the person in the pulpit speak in tongues and then those in the congregation then follow that lead and no one, NO ONE does any interpretation because what they are saying is NOT A LANGUAGE which can be interpreted.

pentecostals/charismatics have been guilty of of what I call "sola experientia" which is my way of saying using experience as a source of revelation. They reject this doctrinally of course but in practice it happens and is often validated by putting "in the spirit" at the end of it.

I have no doubt that the power of the HS can produce intense reactions and emotions possibly making someone feel weak which may result in them falling over (try and close your eyes and lift your hands swaying back and forth and see what happens to you) but we should not give this a title and then begin to seek it and worse teach on it and use false scriptural references to prop it up. Being "slain in the spirit" is not a value found within scripture and so it is something we should deemphasize while emphasizing biblical values and practices.

More mainstream denominations like the AOG have the right focus of doctrine that leans on Biblical guidance but there will be communities that still take on their own culture and dip out of biblical practices and others not under a more reputable denomination may have even greater abuse. But these aren't reasons to reject biblical practices they are reasons to reject unbiblical practices.

 

[GTW27]

Is the new heaven and new earth things? Yes, they are. And there we will see Jesus face to face. No where in 1 Cor. 13 does Paul mention his letters as, the perfect.

His Words, flow like a river, for they are perfect, for they come from The Perfect. The Perfect is Jesus, was Jesus, and always will be Jesus." When The Perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away"This was written only for clarification of His words through His servant Paul.