Speaking in Tongues and (Google) interpretation

[john the youngest]

I wasn't flaming you at all.
I could report you for violating the forum rules, but I think it is best to encourage you first to see what the Scripture actually says and to comprehend it appropriately, with the assumption that you do have a teachable spirit.

I sincerely hope you report yourself. When you said "You can't just make stuff up and expect us to believe it. I think we are more intelligent than that." I didn't report you to anyone, and I reported you to your own conscience. You're still being stiff, a graceful person might perhaps say he was wrong.

"Your treatment of Acts 2 was so off base"

Building straw and flaming me (again) isn't a way to be. I was completely spot on. My argument was against ceesasism. And I compared two scripture. For me 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 and Acts 2:8-10 go together, and it wasn't just foreign languages - that could have happened naturally, but they spoke through God about the wonderful works of God.

I see this as two things, you ought to humble yourself and address the actually thing I was saying, or you just simply quit in a reasonable better nature. People have different views of things.

"From what I am reading of your posts, you are saying that tongues is not miraculous, or inspired by the Holy Spirit, but are normal understandable languages and that what was spoken on the day of Pentecost was mainly Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew or Latin, languages that you said were probably known by the speakers anyway."

No, I said tongues are from the Holy Spirit, still going on, have been for two thousand years, and are not I think just foreign languages. Normal languages were heard on Pentacaust that day - they heard them in their own language. But it was not just hearing their own language that was the miracle.

"You must have missed that the crowd were not pagans but devout Jews ",
Wasn't talking about the crowd, but what they heard, and that it would have fulfilled 1 Corinthians 14:20-21. Please note the sign here in context is a prophecy, and they heard them in their own tongues, and still didn't believe - it had to be explained to them.

"My advice to you is to go back and read Acts 1 and 2 closely, and you will see that there were 120 people in that upper room."

And the upper room isn't what you were talking about. It doesn't say how many people were at pentacost. I don't believe there was 12 or 120. I believe there could have been a lot more - this was out with the public - 3,000 saved, a special occasion they were all expecting, and Jesus had a lot of disciples. I could be wrong, but the bible doesn't say, and putting 12 or 120 in Acts 2 is adding. I do note having just looked it up, that there are two schools of thought, and I don't fit into either because its not biblical.

"You need to be careful on this forum, because it is a protect forum for those who believe that they way modern Pentecostals and Charismatics use the gift of tongues is genuine and Biblical."

There is nothing about that in the faq, and I read it pretty carefully and just now reread it. There are a large number of Christians who believe gifts are today and God answers prayers who aren't Pentecostals, that is a denomination with other beliefs besides just gifts (one of which may be that tongues just restarted - which would be unbiblical, they have always been), and the other could essentially be called a denomination with separate beliefs even though you could argue a Charismatic is one who believes in gifts.

If the forum is just for Pentecostals or charismatics of certain beliefs (I'm sure there are charismatics of different beliefs), I am sure it would say so in the faq or be part of the already existing denomination forums.

I'm not a cessationist, believe in gifts, and not a Pentecostal. I'm not much into being in groups. If your insisting I must be in one group or other, and I'm saying something else, I can see why we are taking so much time talking. I don't talk like that.

 

[john the youngest]

"We would like this forum to remain a safe place where Christian members from all denominations can discuss and learn more about the spiritual gifts."

Just posting that from the faq so no one else becomes confused that this is a place for only two denominations.

Please note - nothing I have said should really be offensive to any belief. I mentioned a few things that I think most people look over, and said I don't really fit in with anyone's belief so far stated. I do believe in grace (gifts) though and God still does the same things as always and still answers prayers.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I sincerely hope you report yourself. When you said "You can't just make stuff up and expect us to believe it. I think we are more intelligent than that." I didn't report you to anyone, and I reported you to your own conscience. You're still being stiff, a graceful person would perhaps say he was wrong.

"Your treatment of Acts 2 was so off base"

Building straw and flaming me (again) isn't a way to be. I was completely spot on. My argument was against ceesasism. And I compared two scripture. For me 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 and Acts 2:8-10 go together, and it wasn't just foreign languages - that could have happened naturally, but they spoke through God about the wonderful works of God.

I see this as two things, you ought to humble yourself and address the actually thing I was saying, or you just simply quit in a reasonable better nature. People have different views of things.

"From what I am reading of your posts, you are saying that tongues is not miraculous, or inspired by the Holy Spirit, but are normal understandable languages and that what was spoken on the day of Pentecost was mainly Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew or Latin, languages that you said were probably known by the speakers anyway."

No, I said tongues are from the Holy Spirit, still going on, have been for two thousand years, and are not I think just foreign languages. Normal languages were heard on Pentacaust that day - they heard them in their own language. But it was not just hearing their own language that was the miracle.

"You must have missed that the crowd were not pagans but devout Jews ",
Wasn't talking about the crowd, but what they heard, and that it would have fulfilled 1 Corinthians 14:20-21. Please note the sign here in context is a prophecy, and they heard them in their own tongues, and still didn't believe - it had to be explained to them.

"My advice to you is to go back and read Acts 1 and 2 closely, and you will see that there were 120 people in that upper room."

And the upper room isn't what you were talking about. It doesn't say how many people were at pentacost. I don't believe there was 12 or 120. I believe there were a lot more - this was out with the public - 3,000 saved, a special occasion they were all expecting, and Jesus had a lot of disciples. I could be wrong, but the bible doesn't say, and putting 12 or 120 in Acts 2 is adding. I do note having just looked it up, that there are two schools of thought, and I don't fit into either because its not biblical.

"You need to be careful on this forum, because it is a protect forum for those who believe that they way modern Pentecostals and Charismatics use the gift of tongues is genuine and Biblical."

There is nothing about that in the faq, and I read it pretty carefully and just now reread it. There are a large number of Christians who believe gifts are today and God answers prayers who aren't Pentecostals, that is a denomination with other beliefs besides just gifts (one of which may be that tongues just restarted - which would be unbiblical, they have always been), and the other could essentially be called a denomination with separate beliefs even though you could argue a Charismatic is one who believes in gifts.

If the forum is just for Pentecostals or charismatics of certain beliefs (I'm sure there are charismatics of different beliefs), I am sure it would say so in the faq or be part of the already existing denomination forums.

I'm not a cessationist, believe in gifts, and not a Pentecostal. I'm not much into being in groups. If your insisting I must be in one group or other, and I'm saying something else, I can see why we are taking so much time talking. I don't talk like that.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and I accept your point about it is not just for Pentecostals and Charismatics but for all those who believe that the gifts of the Spirit are for today.

But in order to get away from kicking each other instead of the ball, lets look at the whole Acts 1-2 narrative and see what is actually there. Let's start at Acts 1:12:

"12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day’s journey. 13 And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room where they were staying: Peter, James, John, and Andrew; Philip and Thomas; Bartholomew and Matthew; James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot; and Judas the son of James. 14 These all continued with one [d]accord in prayer [e]and supplication, with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.

Matthias Chosen
15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the [f]disciples (altogether the number of names was about a hundred and twenty), and said, 16 “Men and brethren, this Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus; 17 for he was numbered with us and obtained a part in this ministry.”

So here the Scripture clearly says that the number of people in the upper room was about 120. So that clears that up. If the Holy Spirit inspired Scripture says 120 then it was 120.

18 (Now this man purchased a field with the [g]wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his [h]entrails gushed out. 19 And it became known to all those dwelling in Jerusalem; so that field is called in their own language, Akel Dama, that is, Field of Blood.)

20 “For it is written in the Book of Psalms:

‘Let his dwelling place be desolate,
And let no one live in it’;

and,

‘Let another take his [j]office.’

21 “Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.”

23 And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.” 26 And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Coming of the Holy Spirit
2 When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all [k]with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 Then there appeared to them [l]divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The narrative clearly shows that no one had left the upper room and so the whole 120 were still there when the Holy Spirit fell. The section in bold makes that clear. They were all there. Also, if the tongues they spoke were just Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek or Latin, the inspired Scripture would not have said that they spoke with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. The Spirit doesn't give utterance to enable someone to speak languages they have already learned and are fluent in.

The Crowd’s Response
5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. 7 Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, “Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own [m]language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and [n]Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” 12 So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “Whatever could this mean?”

These were devout Jews from the different regions of the diaspora where they had been scattered. They were second or third generation at least because their languages were their first native languages of the regions in which they were born. Greek or Hebrew would have been their second or third languages. But what the 120 were speaking were not Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic, but their own native dialects. These were diaspora Jews from all over the known world. There was no way the Galileans would have known any of the languages that the Jews heard them speak. The languages spoken in tongues were unknown to the Galileans, but fully understood by those from the different parts of the known world from where they had travelled to the festival.

13 Others mocking said, “They are full of new wine.”

Peter’s Sermon
14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only [o]the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

17 ‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God,
That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
Your young men shall see visions,
Your old men shall dream dreams.
18 And on My menservants and on My maidservants
I will pour out My Spirit in those days;
And they shall prophesy."

Then Peter got up and preached to them in Greek, a language they all knew. Peter would have known the Greek language, because he was a fisherman in business and he had to know Greek to do business selling his fish to the different markets.

So there is no doubt that the "other" tongues that the 120 received on the Day of Pentecost were not languages known to them. They may not have known at the time that they were speaking "in tongues" as such. Luke is writing about this event in retrospect and he would have known about the gift of tongues, seeing that he was on Paul's ministry team. But they knew that they were speaking languages that they had never learned and had no idea what they were saying, but they knew it was the Holy Spirit.

 

[john the youngest]

fyi - the only thing I got out of this thread is a clearly understanding of how some believe 120 was in Acts 2. I also saw how some believed 12, but already saw it. I still don't believe it really says how many, so it doesn't clearly say is an answer too.

 

[john the youngest]

The Spirit doesn't give utterance to enable someone to speak languages they have already learned and are fluent in.

All the time.

Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

All the time.

Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

This has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I met a guy who's gift of interpretation would operate for people praying in tongues. It's quite rare for it to operate that way I think, since it is mostly associated with interpreting the spoken tongue in the assembly, but all 3 of the inspirational gifts are able to be stepped out and operated at will, but most only learn to operate their prayer tongue.

I used prayer and the bible to translate, it was fairly effective in writing messages back then.

Since then the gift dynamic transformed so the translation occurs automatically, which comes with its own set of issues.

 

[john the youngest]

The Spirit doesn't give utterance to enable someone to speak languages they have already learned and are fluent in.

"8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 in Judea we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” 12 So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “Whatever could this mean?”

The disciples were not fluid in their own language in Judea?

But they could not have spoke about the wonderful works of God through the Holy Spirit without the Holy Spirit.

It remains just as much a miracle speaking by the Holy Spirit in the language native to Judea.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Are you reading this as your understanding is fruitful in yourself - in which case understanding gives fruit to additional understanding just by itself - seems subjective. Or are you reading this as your understanding bears fruit in someone else, because he now understands? The surrounding paragraph seems to mean the latter. 16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

What Paul is saying is that praying with his understanding is praying in the language he learned from birth. When he prayed with the Spirit, he prayed in tongues, a language which he never learned. It has nothing to do with him giving understanding to someone else. He is talking about his personal prayer life, describing the two ways he prayed to God. Your last sentence talks about the limitation of tongues in the public meeting where others would not be able to say Amen to his giving of thanks in tongues because they would have no idea of what he is saying. But when he prayed with the understanding, and with the Spirit, it was in his private prayer times.

 

[john the youngest]

This has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.

originally said

The Spirit doesn't give utterance

Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

This is utterance. What do you think utterance means?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

"8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 in Judea we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” 12 So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “Whatever could this mean?”

The disciples were not fluid in their own language in Judea?

But they could not have spoke about the wonderful works of God through the Holy Spirit without the Holy Spirit.

It remains just as much a miracle speaking by the Holy Spirit in the language native to Judea.

You left out all the other regions of the known world. Judea was just one region. You seem to be implying that the 120 were all praying the same Judean language (Aramaic or Greek). You can't pluck out just one phrase and say that is the whole story. I really don't know what point you are trying to make. We know that the Holy Spirit gave the 120 the utterance to speak in all the languages of the known world.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I guess being given utterance is better than being given an udder ...

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

originally said


Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

This is utterance. What do you think utterance means?

Are you saying that the Spirit has to give you utterance to speak in English? I don't know about you, but my mother and father taught me English and I was fairly fluent by the time I was five years old, long before I became a Christian and knew that there was a Holy Spirit. I guess if I was an African bushman who had never had any contact with Europeans, got converted in a Pentecostal church and received the gift of tongues and then spoke clear Oxford English, then I could say that the Spirit gave me utterance to speak that language although I have never learned it. Actually that is exactly what happened in a church in Kenya in the late 1950s.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I guess being given utterance is better than being given an udder ...

I feel mooooooved by the Spirit.

 

[john the youngest]

What Paul is saying is that praying with his understanding is praying in the language he learned from birth. When he prayed with the Spirit, he prayed in tongues, a language which he never learned. It has nothing to do with him giving understanding to someone else. He is talking about his personal prayer life, describing the two ways he prayed to God. Your last sentence talks about the limitation of tongues in the public meeting where others would not be able to say Amen to his giving of thanks in tongues because they would have no idea of what he is saying. But when he prayed with the understanding, and with the Spirit, it was in his private prayer times.

This is pretty far off what most denominations believe by being in Spirit. It's getting a little late for me to talk about this more, so after this message I will beg off this conversation - I think you are in a vastly different time zone then me, but two things

I'm sure I pray in the Spirit and talk to God all the time, but it is not in a prayer tongue (although there have been several definitions of the gifts of tongues here, I believe a private prayer tongue is even a newer one than most - prove me wrong if its been used a 100 years.

But one sign someone is not praying in tongues is that they are not loving. John says God is love, and if someone claims to love (and know) God, and don't love their brother, they are a liar. "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?"

It's a point missed by some. I've seen a person claim how spiritual something was, and I said but where is the love for others here if it is so spiritual?

And one problem of a tongue that is not understood by others as a language (meaning naturally understood), is one of the key points of acts is they were praising God "we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.", that is taken away - they hear none of that.

And note - they were not just praising God by making it up, they were given it through the Holy Spirit.

 

[john the youngest]

Are you saying that the Spirit has to give you utterance to speak in English?

If you want to follow Jesus Christ, he said so.

Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12 For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

This is pretty far off what most denominations believe by being in Spirit. It's getting a little late for me to talk about this more, so after this message I will beg off this conversation - I think you are in a vastly different time zone then me, but two things

I'm sure I pray in the Spirit and talk to God all the time, but it is not in a prayer tongue (although there have been several definitions of the gifts of tongues here, I believe a private prayer tongue is even a newer one than most - prove me wrong if its been used a 100 years.

But one sign someone is not praying in tongues is that they are not loving. John says God is love, and if someone claims to love (and know) God, and don't love their brother, they are a liar. "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?"

It's a point missed by some. I've seen a person claim how spiritual something was, and I said but where is the love for others here if it is so spiritual?

And one problem of a tongue that is not understood by others as a language (meaning naturally understood), is one of the key points of acts is they were praising God "we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.", that is taken away - they hear none of that.

And note - they were not just praising God by making it up, they were given it through the Holy Spirit.

If a person is praying privately to God in tongues, then it doesn't matter whether others understand it or not, because the prayer is not to them but to God. And if the person is genuinely praying to God in an unlearned language that he believes that God understands, then who is there to judge him but God Himself? Therefore private prayer in tongues is between God and the person praying.

Most of the tongues prayed in church and in Youtube videos without interpretation is of the flesh, because one cannot pray in the Spirit while at the same time disobeying inspired Scripture where Paul says not to speak in tongues in public meetings without interpretation. Therefore, those in the flesh cannot please God, and so I understand that there can be a real lack of love from such people. Some people get so heavenly minded that they lose touch with how they should behave towards the others around them.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

If you want to follow Jesus Christ, he said so.

Luke 12:11“Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. 12 For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”

But that's totally different matter to speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives utterance. I agree that you are speaking of a type of utterance, but it is not the ability to speak English but to have the words to defend the Gospel and give an answer to those who accuse you. To say that Luke 12:11 is about utterance to be able to speak in tongues is twisting Jesus' words right out of their context and putting words into Jesus' mouth that He never said.

I really don't know how you read the Bible. Do you read whole passages and chapters at a time to determine what the Scripture actually says, or do you base your understanding of Scripture on isolated verses plucked out of their context. I just don't understand how you can take Luke12:11 out of what Jesus is saying about being persecuted for Him and how we should trust the Holy Spirit to be able to an answer for our faith, and make it say about utterance to be able to speak in tongues. It sounds like comparing apples and oranges to me.

 

[john the youngest]

If a person is praying privately to God in tongues, then it doesn't matter whether others understand it or not, because the prayer is not to them but to God. And if the person is genuinely praying to God in an unlearned language that he believes that God understands, then who is there to judge him but God Himself? Therefore private prayer in tongues is between God and the person praying.

My impression is tongues is defined by some as being in the Spirit - "the proof", while you can pray in something unknown, and still not be in the Spirit.

 

[john the youngest]

It's possible to hear something in your own language and still not understand it, and still need it to be explained (preached) to you.

1 Corinthians 2:14
“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

I'm going. be back tomorrow if anyone wants to carry this conversation on.