Speaking in tongues

[1stcenturylady]

It's only an insult when one has the same values as the world.
I am a Pentecostal to the core, by the grace of God.
I was raised anti-pentecostal, in a very reason-based, IQ-valuing denomination. The Conservative Mennonites. Everything that comes over the pulpit there is very reasoned, very well-modulated, and appealing to a high IQ.

But I came smack-up against the power of the Holy Ghost, and had to make a choice: Am I going to define myself by the standards of the world, and lean on my human reasoning in my approach to God and the Bible? Or am I going to do like Paul said in I Cor 2, and know nothing but Christ, and Him crucified? Am I going to speak with the wisdom which man teaches, or am I going to lean only on the wisdom which the Holy Ghost teaches? Am I going to look for high-IQ seminary-educated preaching, or am I going to look for miracles, signs, and wonders?

Because we can't have it both ways.

It's not an insult to tell one who has died to his pride, that those who believe the Word of God and operate in the power of the Spirit, tend to have lower IQ's than those who refuse to believe to that extent.

So what does this verse mean to you? You don't seem to believe what it says, so re-word it according to what you think it means?

1 Corinthians 14:2New King James Version (NKJV)

2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

 

[PollyJetix]

And, 1stcenturylady...
If you will carefully read all that I said, you will find I never said that it is impossible to be a Pentecostal, and also have a high IQ. What I said was that Pentecostals TEND to have lower IQ's.

Therefore, I never said your IQ is low. I never intended to say that about you or anyone else.
As I said earlier, I myself have a high IQ. But I do not see that as a spiritual asset.

Every person with a high IQ struggles with over-self-reliance on his or her brain.
We tend to think very highly of our own ability to reason things through.
We tend to think our own conclusions are the end of the matter.
We tend to argue with other people, maintaining our own reasoning power is better than theirs.
And we tend to stubbornly resist the Holy Ghost trying to re-educate us beyond our conclusions.

 

[PollyJetix]

So what does this verse mean to you? You don't seem to believe what it says, so re-word it?

1 Corinthians 14:2New King James Version (NKJV)

2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

I explained it above.
The little word FOR in the middle means BECAUSE.

And the little word "however" also has a meaning, and a bearing on the overall meaning of the verse.

And that little word "however" helps us understand also.
Because "however" (according to the dictionary) "is used to introduce a statement that contrasts with something that has been said previously."

Therefore,
"no one understands him" is contrasted with "in the spirit, he speaks mysteries."

It is obvious the overall meaning is simply that when we are speaking in tongues, we speak from our spirits, to God. We speak without understanding what we are talking about. And we don't expect anyone else to understand them, either.

Tongues are not directed from, nor are they directed toward, human brains.
That is the WHY that the "for" (because) means.


It is possible to get so literal with the Scriptures that we actually unintentionally twist the real meaning.

I knew a man once who was so literal that he said since Jesus is the Word, and the Bible is the Word, then the Bible he read was actually Jesus.
That man tipped over into schizophrenia soon after that.

God expects us to have common sense.

And using common sense, we see the unbelievers on the day of Pentecost said they heard them SPEAK in their own languages. They would have been able, by watching their mouths, to tell if the 120 were actually speaking their languages or not.
And if they weren't, they would have made mention of the even greater miracle of watching them speaking a foreign language, but hearing it in their own.

But they didn't. Because what they saw matched what they heard.
The 120 SPOKE those foreign languages.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I explained it above.
The little word FOR in the middle means BECAUSE.

And the little word "however" also has a meaning, and a bearing on the overall meaning of the verse.

And that little word "however" helps us understand also.
Because "however" (according to the dictionary) "is used to introduce a statement that contrasts with something that has been said previously."

Therefore,
"no one understands him" is contrasted with "in the spirit, he speaks mysteries."

It is obvious the overall meaning is simply that when we are speaking in tongues, we speak from our spirits, to God. We speak without understanding what we are talking about. And we don't expect anyone else to understand them, either.

Tongues are not directed from, nor are they directed toward, human brains.
That is the WHY that the "for" (because) means.


It is possible to get so literal with the Scriptures that we actually unintentionally twist the real meaning.

I knew a man once who was so literal that he said since Jesus is the Word, and the Bible is the Word, then the Bible he read was actually Jesus.
That man tipped over into schizophrenia soon after that.

God expects us to have common sense.

And using common sense, we see the unbelievers on the day of Pentecost said they heard them SPEAK in their own languages. They would have been able, by watching their mouths, to tell if the 120 were actually speaking their languages or not.
And if they weren't, they would have made mention of the even greater miracle of watching them speaking a foreign language, but hearing it in their own.

But they didn't. Because what they saw matched what they heard.
The 120 SPOKE those foreign languages.

Again, how did they understand what was being said, according to 1 Cor. 14:2? So you think they read their lips instead of actually hearing?

 

[PollyJetix]

Again, how did they understand what was being said, according to 1 Cor. 14:2? So you think they read their lips instead of actually hearing?

No, dear. They both saw and heard.
Otherwise, they could not have said what they did.
"We heard them speak in our tongues..."

 

[1stcenturylady]

No, dear. They both saw and heard.
Otherwise, they could not have said what they did.
"We heard them speak in our tongues..."

Heard naturally, or by the gift of interpretation of tongues?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Exactly. Read my last post to Oscar. The interpretation of tongues is prophecy, also teaching, knowledge and revelation as in verse 6 of 1 Cor. 14.

I have now read around 2/3 of your book. I find it the best book I have ever read on the gift of tongues that explains it so well. You show good depth of research and excellent Scriptural foundation what what you have written. I have been praying in tongues for 50 years and have read most books on the topic, but I learned new things in your book and I have been really blessed as a result. I cannot see that anyone could deny the genuineness of modern tongues after reading your book. I would recommend it to anyone who is genuinely seeking the truth about tongues and for the gift itself.

Read my review on Amazon.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I have now read around 2/3 of your book. I find it the best book I have ever read on the gift of tongues that explains it so well. You show good depth of research and excellent Scriptural foundation what what you have written. I have been praying in tongues for 50 years and have read most books on the topic, but I learned new things in your book and I have been really blessed as a result. I cannot see that anyone could deny the genuineness of modern tongues after reading your book. I would recommend it to anyone who is genuinely seeking the truth about tongues and for the gift itself.

Thank you so much. You brought me to tears.

 

[PollyJetix]

Heard naturally, or by the gift of interpretation of tongues?

They heard with their natural ears!
And what they saw with their eyes, was that the lips of those speaking, was moving according to the sounds they heard!
Seriously.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

read carefully:

Acts 2:6-11
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.
7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

The Word does not say it was a miracle in the hearing.
And it does not say that they heard it differently than it was spoken.

Yes, they were confounded. They were amazed, and marveled. And yes, they questioned how they were hearing their own languages.
But they recognized that those men were actually speaking their languages.

I consulted Biblehub and read all the different versions. Most of these say that they heard the languages, so the majority of translations support the miracle of hearing more than a miracle of speaking.

 

[1stcenturylady]

They heard with their natural ears!
And what they saw with their eyes, was that the lips of those speaking, was moving according to the sounds they heard!
Seriously.

That's what you've been saying. Just wanted to confirm that. So, again, I ask you how can you link what you believe with 1 Cor. 14:2, that NO MAN UNDERSTANDS.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

They heard with their natural ears!
And what they saw with their eyes, was that the lips of those speaking, was moving according to the sounds they heard!
Seriously.

I am not convinced. If 120 people were speaking all the different languages at once it would have sounded like a complete confusion! I saw an insurance advertisement on TV where a person was confused by three people speaking to her and giving advice all at once. You didn't hear one one of what was being spoken. Just think of 120 speaking at the same time! No. The 120 were praising God in tongues and the hearers heard their own language through their ears. I believe 1st Century Lady when she says that it was a manifestation of the supernatural gift of interpretation of tongues which occurred. I read her book on the topic, and I am an old warrior, not easily convinced by things I have not heard before, but I am totally convinced by what she has written. She has researched this thoroughly drawing from a wide range of commentaries and has carefully read through the Scriptures that she has used to support her view. Also, in my 50 years of experience, I have personally witnessed what she is putting forward in terms of tongues interpretation.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

It is impossible to understand 1 Cor 14 as an exclusive definition of how the genuine gift of tongues works.
What Paul was talking about was bringing the genuine gift of tongues, which the Corinthians were using wrongly, into line with the fruit of the Spirit.
Paul talks about personal prayer tongues in verse 2. But from about verse 5 and onward, he is talking about the operation of tongues in God-speaking-to-the-church. Which, if interpreted, is the same value as prophecy... which, when compared to Acts 2, showed me something else:

Did they prophesy on the Day of Pentecost? No. They spoke in tongues.
But those tongues were understandable by the audience. Which is the same function as interpretation... which is why Peter said "This is that spoken by Joel... your sons and daughters shall PROPHESY!" Those tongues were the same thing as prophesy, because those standing by, were able to understand.

Yes, they were the same as prophecy because the hearers were given the supernatural gift of interpretation! Notice that later on in Acts the believers spoke in tongues and prophesied. This means that that they spoke in tongues and interpreted. In 1stCenturyLady's book she gives an example of someone preaching in English and then quietly spoke in tongues, and a group of Taiwanese men heard their own language when the tongues were spoken. Somewhere else in the book a person was speaking in their own native language and a listener heard it in English! I find that amazing, and it shows that God is not limited in the ways He gets people convinced about the Gospel. I think He loves doing stuff like that and He gets grieved when people limit Him and put Him in a corner with His hands tied, which so often happens in our churches through wrong and prejudiced teaching.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

But... the word says the miracle was in the speaking.
The manifestation of the Holy Ghost falling was two-fold: cloven tongues of fire on each head, and each began to SPEAK in other tongues.

This is what the miracle-gift was.

The Word does not say there was a miraculous gift given to unbelievers, enabling them to hear things that were not even spoken!

After all, who is it that God gives the gifts to? Believers? or unbelievers?

These were devout Jews. In a sense they were believers and God did it to enhance their experience in Him by introducing them to the risen Christ. I don't think that God can be limited in how He decides to get people saved. He does not always do what we think He should do. He will always out think us. God is greater than even His Word. His written Word is not the whole truth. Christ Himself is the truth. The New Testament shows us enough of the truth to get us saved and on the right track. Those who limit God to their own logic, even their own interpretation of Scripture may hear the voice of God speaking to them: "Who is he who darkens counsel without knowledge?" Job's friends thought they had all the answers for Job, but they did not know what was really going on in heaven between God and Satan.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I love this. You put into words very well what I have been unable to articulate.
This chapter has been mishandled, especially by anti-Pentecostals, seeking to squelch the gifts that scare them.

And, admittedly, the wide-open Pentecostal churches tend not to run high on IQ.
But then, Paul DID say that not many of the wise of this world are called. People who enjoy high IQ scores tend to rely on human reasoning, and have a hard time receiving the things of the Spirit.

I wonder what drove you away from the Pentecostal church?
Of course, Pentecostals can be quite carnal, as illustrated by 1 Corinthians.
Lots of infighting, schisms, sexual sin, etc. Most of us would have written such a church off.
But Paul didn't give up on them. He never even told them their tongues were "of the devil!"
He never told them they had an evil spirit. He just told them to grow up.

There were a number of reasons:
I was treated with suspicion because I adopted Puritan Calvinistic theology along with my Pentecostal theology. Also, my first wife left me, and so I was put on the outer because of that, because they believed that divorced people had committed the nearest thing to the unforgiveable sin. I also found that the teaching of the particular church was very narrow and after 11 years, I had heard it all. I wanted something more than what they could offer, so I went to see how the other half lived. Because they opposed academic learning, I missed out on opportunities when I was younger, but after leaving and going to an Anglican church, I was introduced to theology study and learned that I could be enrolled for a theology degree. Actually I went to university and got an MA in English Literature instead (this was during my middle to late 30s.) Four years ago I started a masters in Divinity and finished it last year. This was the result of being involved in Anglican, Baptist and Presbyterian churches. At no time during my fellowship with these church did any of them put me down for my Charismatic beliefs or practice. The other thing that disillusioned me was the gossiping and backbiting that went on in the Charismatic church. Someone would go for counselling, and suddenly it was spread all around the church. So, after all that, I felt it was time to move on.

By the way, I have been remarried since 1990 and I believe that God being a God of second chances, He gave me one, and I have never regretted it. And I have seen the power of God work through my ministry anyway, so I can trust Him that He knows the true circumstances around my divorce and does not hold it against me. I think a lot of Pentecostals would, and that is why I would not have any ministry there. Actually, I have found a much more satisfying ministry in my present church. I have taught on the gifts of the Spirit, and the people are very responsive, but I have learned that although people are open, it takes a long time to change the culture of a traditional church.

 

[PollyJetix]

I have spent far too much time today trying to argue... and it's all for nothing.
1stcenturylady, you are far too literal. It goes against common sense.
And Oscarr, if I am at an international airport in a foreign land, and am surrounded with languages I do not understand, and I hear ONE voice speaking MY language, all those other voices fade into the background.

 

[PollyJetix]

There were a number of reasons:
I was treated with suspicion because I adopted Puritan Calvinistic theology along with my Pentecostal theology. Also, my first wife left me, and so I was put on the outer because of that, because they believed that divorced people had committed the nearest thing to the unforgiveable sin. I also found that the teaching of the particular church was very narrow and after 11 years, I had heard it all. I wanted something more than what they could offer, so I went to see how the other half lived. Because they opposed academic learning, I missed out on opportunities when I was younger, but after leaving and going to an Anglican church, I was introduced to theology study and learned that I could be enrolled for a theology degree. Actually I went to university and got an MA in English Literature instead (this was during my middle to late 30s.) Four years ago I started a masters in Divinity and finished it last year. This was the result of being involved in Anglican, Baptist and Presbyterian churches. At no time during my fellowship with these church did any of them put me down for my Charismatic beliefs or practice. The other thing that disillusioned me was the gossiping and backbiting that went on in the Charismatic church. Someone would go for counselling, and suddenly it was spread all around the church. So, after all that, I felt it was time to move on.

By the way, I have been remarried since 1990 and I believe that God being a God of second chances, He gave me one, and I have never regretted it. And I have seen the power of God work through my ministry anyway, so I can trust Him that He knows the true circumstances around my divorce and does not hold it against me. I think a lot of Pentecostals would, and that is why I would not have any ministry there. Actually, I have found a much more satisfying ministry in my present church. I have taught on the gifts of the Spirit, and the people are very responsive, but I have learned that although people are open, it takes a long time to change the culture of a traditional church.

Very interesting.
I am also divorced, although it was against my will, and happened about 15 years ago.
The Pentecostal church I am in is rather old-fashioned in many respects, which suits me fine. However, they have no problem with me being divorced, as several in the church are divorced and remarried.

My background is very Conservative Mennonite... which was hard for me to let go of. I was trained thoroughly as a child, in viewing the Scriptures through Mennonite lenses.
But it is my very large family who has the problem with divorce... and even worse, remarriage.

I have never remarried. I did not find freedom to do so until just a year ago... when God suddenly opened my eyes to the fact that the moral code of the Law still stands. God does not change. The definition of sin in the NT is "sin is the transgression of the law." Paul says that even in this day of grace, he could not knwo sin, except by the Law. And Paul says also that even in the NT, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just and good."
And Paul also said that now the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in those who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

At the intro to the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said he did not come to destroy the law, but that as long as heaven and earth endured, not one jot or one tittle would pass.
Upon further study, I found that everything Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount was found also in the OT!

This means Deuteronomy 24:1-4 still stands as God's moral code on the matter of divorce and remarriage. Even the abomination of verse 4... which is what my old Mennonite church requires!

Jesus never turned an abomination of the OT into a commandment of the NT.

Best wishes to you! It sounds like you landed on your feet.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I mentioned the IQ because you said that most Pentecostals have low IQs. That was appalling. But I am smart enough not to misinterpret the written word when it contradicts established scripture.

I don't think it is a matter of IQ. I think that it is because the Old Time Pentecostals, along with rejecting doctors for healing (which was a disaster for many), they also rejected academic learning, especially for women. Most old time Pentecostal pastors were from poorer working-class backgrounds, and I think that this contributed to the view.

However, Oral Roberts changed all that by building a Pentecostal university to give academic training to Pentecostal and Charismatic ministers and leaders. I understand that this was fiercely opposed and criticised by many Pentecostal groups initially. But the test of time has proved the great value of the trained leaders and preachers who have graduated from Oral Roberts University. I did my M.Div though Nations University, an on-line Bible college situated in Louisiana. My student adviser lives in Nashville Tennessee! I asked them the hard questions about the Charismatic, and they were totally accepting of it, even though their staff are affiliated with the Church of Christ. I wrote essays clearly supporting the gifts of the Spirit, and I still got 95%. I wrote one on Healing Then and Now, where I examined the New Testament, Church History, Current practice, and the views of some of the prominent modern healing evangelists and their methods and views. I wrote a 50 page research paper and got 95% for it. The degree took me three whole years, and was a wonderful journey. In my last year they achieved accreditation, so I now have a fully accredited degree. I could become an ordained minister, but not in the Presbyterian church because they ordain only ministers from their own Knox College here in NZ. I couldn't become an AOG minister because I am divorced and remarried. I might have to find an obscure African church to become ordained! (Joke), but I wouldn't be able to because my wife told me that she did not marry me to become a minister's wife! So, because we make important decisions like that as a committee of two to confirm God's will for us, I have to accept that I am never going to become an ordained minister! But I am accepted by my congregation as a lay preacher and they enjoy my ministry. That's good enough for me. By the way, when I was 12, my IQ was 112. I think that to be able to get two mastorates without failing a paper, God must have increased my IQ somewhat!

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

There is a very easy way to tell if someone is actually speaking the language you are hearing.
It's called, "watching the mouth."

Haven't you ever watched a speaker as he was being translated?
You would never have said you heard him speak your language.

I do that when I am watching a spaghetti western when the English is dubbed over the Italian!

 

[PollyJetix]

I don't think it is a matter of IQ. I think that it is because the Old Time Pentecostals, along with rejecting doctors for healing (which was a disaster for many), they also rejected academic learning, especially for women. Most old time Pentecostal pastors were from poorer working-class backgrounds, and I think that this contributed to the view.

However, Oral Roberts changed all that by building a Pentecostal university to give academic training to Pentecostal and Charismatic ministers and leaders. I understand that this was fiercely opposed and criticised by many Pentecostal groups initially. But the test of time has proved the great value of the trained leaders and preachers who have graduated from Oral Roberts University. I did my M.Div though Nations University, an on-line Bible college situated in Louisiana. My student adviser lives in Nashville Tennessee! I asked them the hard questions about the Charismatic, and they were totally accepting of it, even though their staff are affiliated with the Church of Christ. I wrote essays clearly supporting the gifts of the Spirit, and I still got 95%. I wrote one on Healing Then and Now, where I examined the New Testament, Church History, Current practice, and the views of some of the prominent modern healing evangelists and their methods and views. I wrote a 50 page research paper and got 95% for it. The degree took me three whole years, and was a wonderful journey. In my last year they achieved accreditation, so I now have a fully accredited degree. I could become an ordained minister, but not in the Presbyterian church because they ordain only ministers from their own Knox College here in NZ. I couldn't become an AOG minister because I am divorced and remarried. I might have to find an obscure African church to become ordained! (Joke), but I wouldn't be able to because my wife told me that she did not marry me to become a minister's wife! So, because we make important decisions like that as a committee of two to confirm God's will for us, I have to accept that I am never going to become an ordained minister! But I am accepted by my congregation as a lay preacher and they enjoy my ministry. That's good enough for me. By the way, when I was 12, my IQ was 112. I think that to be able to get two mastorates without failing a paper, God must have increased my IQ somewhat!

Oscarr, IQ scores are affected somewhat by education. So your insight seems quite valid.