Tongues, a different view.

[Saint Steven]

Look at the counterfeit. Haven't you heard of skeptics coming into a Pentecostal church, hearing tongues and then the interpretation, and them saying they know the language of the tongues, and the interpretation given was wrong. What they HEARD was blasphemy. The tongues wasn't blasphemy, the counterfeit interpretation of tongues by the skeptic was of the devil.

I have asked a pastor who interprets what he hears. He hears tongues and it turns into English. The same service, a woman was in the audience to understood Zulu. Neither was the language of the tongues, but what they HEARD was the interpretation in a language they understood, and they matched.

Thanks for your reply.

I don't think you have to be a visitor to have skepticism about a tongues interpretation. I think we have all heard a message in tongues that was two or three sentences long followed by a five paragraph interpretation. What's up with that? On the other hand I have heard tongues that had recognizable verbal patterns that were matched in the interpretation. Most notably, repeated words in the tongues that were repeated words in the interpretation.

That's a good explanation from the pastor that interprets. But you said "He hears tongues and it turns into English." That's different than only hearing it in English.

I have heard interpretations which sound like the interpretation is coming like a prophecy, phrase by phrase. As if the Lord prompted them to interpret, but it came forth like a prophetic message. In fact, this seems to be the norm from my perspective.

The bottom line is that none of this is a biblical defense. We are entertaining hearsay and individual reports about what we suppose is happening. Again, I don't want to put the Holy Spirit in a box and say what can or cannot happen. But we need to be discerning about these things and not try to create doctrines out of what we suppose might be happening.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Thanks for your reply.

I don't think you have to be a visitor to have skepticism about a tongues interpretation. I think we have all heard a message in tongues that was two or three sentences long followed by a five paragraph interpretation. What's up with that? On the other hand I have heard tongues that had recognizable verbal patterns that were matched in the interpretation. Most notably, repeated words in the tongues that were repeated words in the interpretation.

That's a good explanation from the pastor that interprets. But you said "He hears tongues and it turns into English." That's different than only hearing it in English.

I have heard interpretations which sound like the interpretation is coming like a prophecy, phrase by phrase. As if the Lord prompted them to interpret, but it came forth like a prophetic message. In fact, this seems to be the norm from my perspective.

The bottom line is that none of this is a biblical defense. We are entertaining hearsay and individual reports about what we suppose is happening. Again, I don't want to put the Holy Spirit in a box and say what can or cannot happen. But we need to be discerning about these things and not try to create doctrines out of what we suppose might be happening.

Actually, the interpretation isn't always word for word translation. That's nothing to go by. Haven't you ever heard a short parable with a long explanation?

5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification. 6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

As you see here by the Semitic writing style, what is after "unless" the interpretation is clarified. Therefore, the interpretation is revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

 

[Saint Steven]

Actually, the interpretation isn't always word for word translation. That's nothing to go by. Haven't you ever heard a short parable with a long explanation?

5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification. 6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

As you see here by the Semitic writing style, what is after "unless" the interpretation is clarified. Therefore, the interpretation is revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

Thanks again.
But frankly, if the "interpretation" isn't word for word (phrase for phrase) then by definition it is not an interpretation. Right? As you indicate, it's an explanation. (beyond the interpretation)

Nor do I think you can claim that the last half of verse six is a definition of the interpretation of tongues. The broader context is the comparison of tongues (without interpretation) and prophecy.

If this is not the case, there should be more supporting scripture. Have any?
I think this is a good discussion. Hopefully I am not wearing your patience thin.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Thanks again.
But frankly, if the "interpretation" isn't word for word (phrase for phrase) then by definition it is not an interpretation. Right? As you indicate, it's an explanation. (beyond the interpretation)

Nor do I think you can claim that the last half of verse six is a definition of the interpretation of tongues. The broader context is the comparison of tongues (without interpretation) and prophecy.

If this is not the case, there should be more supporting scripture. Have any?
I think this is a good discussion. Hopefully I am not wearing your patience thin.

You are confusing interpretation with translation. It is a paraphrase.

The "comparison" is also tongues without interpretation and tongues with interpretation.

Chapter 14 is showing there are two types of tongues. The sign of tongues - our prayer language, and the gift of tongues with interpretation for the profit of all which is also prophecy. Our prayer language is great and Paul would that they all use their prayer language, but in church only the gift of diverse kinds of tongues is important, because it is always generated with the gift of interpretation of tongues following. So when the interpretation of tongues follows it is equal with prophecy.

Don't get me wrong, there is also a gift of prophecy. But, verse 6, whether you accept it or not, shows that the interpretation is FROM God, and what it is saying for the profit of all.

 

[Saint Steven]

... Our prayer language is great and Paul would that they all use their prayer language, but in church only the gift of diverse kinds of tongues is important, because it is always generated with the gift of interpretation of tongues following...

Thanks, this is a good discussion.

Is that what you meant to say? "... because it is always generated with the gift of interpretation of tongues following." ???

Wasn't that the whole (main) point of 1 Corinthians chapter 14 ???
That interpretation WASN'T always following? Which meant a lack of edification.
Not a problem with prophecy, since no interpretation is needed.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Thanks, this is a good discussion.

Is that what you meant to say? "... because it is always generated with the gift of interpretation of tongues following." ???

Wasn't that the whole (main) point of 1 Corinthians chapter 14 ???
That interpretation WASN'T always following? Which meant a lack of edification.
Not a problem with prophecy, since no interpretation is needed.

There are two tongues manifestations. One without interpretation (sign), and one with mandated interpretation following (gift),

The sign of tongues -
- Mark 16:17 - with no interpretation necessary - TO God.

- To all who believe (whether they know they have it or not).

- Ephesians 6:14 Prayer language for intercession.

- Jude 1:20 Exercising your spirit.

- Not for corporate edification in church, as God doesn't always give an interpretation of prayers to Him.

- 1 Corinthians 14:22 - negative sign to an unbeliever, confirming them in the unbelief by their criticism vs. 23.

- Acts 2:11 Can be used as a choir of believers (only) singing perfect praise to God - not for Sunday morning, but maybe the believers meeting on Wednesday night.

The gift of tongues -
-1 Corinthains 12:10 - with interpretation necessary - FROM God. Equal to prophecy. 1 Corinthians 14:6

- Not given to all believers, but is more like an office - same with the interpreter. 1 Corinthians 12:30 - "Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?"

- 1 Corinthians 14:27 Limited to 2 or 3 with one interpreting.

- 1 Corinthians 14:24-25 Interpretation of tongues convicts, just as naturally spoken prophecy does.

How interpretation of tongues is equated to prophecy
- 1 Corinthians 14:25 is focusing on the sign not the gift.

- 1 Corinthians 14:21 to 25 is the context. The sign is a sign "which will be spoken against." That is the type of sign our prayer language is and compared to the gift with interpretation. Same type of sign as the sign of Jesus who is also duel (for the fall and rise of many in Israel) - confirming either a believer in their belief, but also confirming a Pharisee in their unbelief - Luke 2:34-35 - compare with 1 Corinthians 14:25. Same with our prayer language without interpretation. It would confirm an unsaved or uninformed person in their unbelief, but with interpretation they rejoice.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think most of the Jews were born-again and already saved. Jesus says whoever believes is saved. The Jews were abandoning the Old Covenant and entering the New. Had they not already believed, they would not have asked Peter what they should do.

This looks like "a leap in the dark" conclusion without any Biblical basis. No one was born again until the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came to the Church. The Jew weren't abandoning the Old Covenant at all. This is clearly seen with the Jewish Christians requiring the Gentile Christians to be circumcised and to follow the Law of Moses in order to be saved. Paul and Barnabas had to go to Jerusalem and have a conference with the Apostles to sort things out. The New Testament is there for a reason and it needs to be read carefully before jumping to unfounded conclusions.

 

[Saint Steven]

There are two tongues manifestations. One without interpretation (sign), and one with mandated interpretation following (gift),

The sign of tongues -
- Mark 16:17 - with no interpretation necessary - TO God.

- To all who believe (whether they know they have it or not).

- Ephesians 6:14 Prayer language for intercession.

- Jude 1:20 Exercising your spirit.

- Not for corporate edification in church, as God doesn't always give an interpretation of prayers to Him.

- 1 Corinthians 14:22 - negative sign to an unbeliever, confirming them in the unbelief by their criticism vs. 23.

- Acts 2:11 Can be used as a choir of believers (only) singing perfect praise to God - not for Sunday morning, but maybe the believers meeting on Wednesday night.

The gift of tongues -
-1 Corinthains 12:10 - with interpretation necessary - FROM God. Equal to prophecy. 1 Corinthians 14:6

- Not given to all believers, but is more like an office - same with the interpreter. 1 Corinthians 12:30 - "Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?"

- 1 Corinthians 14:27 Limited to 2 or 3 with one interpreting.

- 1 Corinthians 14:24-25 Interpretation of tongues convicts, just as naturally spoken prophecy does.

How interpretation of tongues is equated to prophecy
- 1 Corinthians 14:25 is focusing on the sign not the gift.

- 1 Corinthians 14:21 to 25 is the context. The sign is a sign "which will be spoken against." That is the type of sign our prayer language is and compared to the gift with interpretation. Same type of sign as the sign of Jesus who is also duel (for the fall and rise of many in Israel) - confirming either a believer in their belief, but also confirming a Pharisee in their unbelief - Luke 2:34-35 - compare with 1 Corinthians 14:25. Same with our prayer language without interpretation. It would confirm an unsaved or uninformed person in their unbelief, but with interpretation they rejoice.

That's interesting. Did you write that, or do you have a source to cite?

My understanding is that interpretation of tongues is preferable, but not mandatory.
The Apostle says a message in tongues isn't edifying, not forbidden. Interpretation of tongues is the most difficult manifestation to stipulate. The person speaking the tongues doesn't know if they will have an accompanying interpretation. And there may not be anyone else in the congregation that can interpret. You just have to move on.

Frankly, I am edified by tongues whether there is interpretation or not.
Just to bask in the glow of a manifestation of the Spirit is fine by me.

Not sure why you divide up tongues as you have.
Are not all "signs" also "gifts"? When is a sign not a gift? (manifestation)

Also dangerously close to agreement with Cessationism. Which claims that the gifts were given as initial signs. Once this was accomplished they were no longer needed. I realize that you aren't claiming that.

This is how I define tongues. (my writing)
There may be more, but this is the basic scriptural list.

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

 

[Dave-W]

I think most of the Jews were born-again and already saved. Jesus says whoever believes is saved. The Jews were abandoning the Old Covenant and entering the New. Had they not already believed, they would not have asked Peter what they should do.

That was only 3000 out of well over a million Jews in town for the feast.

 

[Dave-W]

I don't recall any cessationists who do not believe in miracles and healing.

Almost all of the cessationist I know reject healings and miracles too.

 

[Saint Steven]

Almost all of the cessationist I know reject healings and miracles too.

As I understand it, they believe in healing and miracles.
But that God does them independent of human involvement.
They will pray for sick people, but they don't believe that the healing comes through them. That might pray for a miracle but they will not use their authority to bring one about.

 

[1stcenturylady]

That's interesting. Did you write that, or do you have a source to cite?

My understanding is that interpretation of tongues is preferable, but not mandatory.
The Apostle says a message in tongues isn't edifying, not forbidden. Interpretation of tongues is the most difficult manifestation to stipulate. The person speaking the tongues doesn't know if they will have an accompanying interpretation. And there may not be anyone else in the congregation that can interpret. You just have to move on.

Frankly, I am edified by tongues whether there is interpretation or not.
Just to bask in the glow of a manifestation of the Spirit is fine by me.

Not sure why you divide up tongues as you have.
Are not all "signs" also "gifts"? When is a sign not a gift? (manifestation)

Also dangerously close to agreement with Cessationism. Which claims that the gifts were given as initial signs. Once this was accomplished they were no longer needed. I realize that you aren't claiming that.

This is how I define tongues. (my writing)
There may be more, but this is the basic scriptural list.

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

I wrote it. I wrote a book on tongues after studying it for seven years. Amazon has it - The Hidden Mystery Behind Tongues. It has a good review.

You claim5) Evangelistic language. Do you have a scriptural foundation for that? That is pretty much the only one I don't agree with. It is also the one most cited by Cessationists that I've heard as the only reason for it in the beginning of the Church in the first place. Rather than evangelistic language, I would go with evangelistic interpretation to be scriptural. (Different gift, but associated) What I've found that when someone outside the church but being called by God receives the interpretation, they don't even recognize it as the gift of interpretation of tongues as all they are hearing is their own language, not tongues.

The separating sign of tongues is still being manifested today more than ever, especially, as it is coming from inside the Church by Cessationists who cause widespread mocking and unbelief - a cancer. I believe tongues was made the way it was to separate the tares and the wheat inside the church - the first place for God to judge. Have you ever noticed how faith has grown in the last 50 years? It is because of the growing faith of the Charismatic renewal with tongues as the common denominator, but is not seeing manifestations of the glory of God.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Almost all of the cessationist I know reject healings and miracles too.

Unfortunately, many mock those with the gift of healing saying, why aren't you emptying the hospitals. Funny, they don't know about John G. Lake who did just that!

 

[Saint Steven]

5) Evangelistic language. Do you have a scriptural foundation for that? That is pretty much the only one I don't agree with.

Scripturally, that would be the outpouring at Pentecost. Acts chapter two. (obviously)
It differs from the other four in that the unknown tongue being spoken is in the language of the hearer. Why do you disagree? (if you still do)

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

 

[1stcenturylady]

Scripturally, that would be the outpouring at Pentecost. Acts chapter two. (obviously)
It differs from the other four in that the unknown tongue being spoken is in the language of the hearer. Why do you disagree? (if you still do)

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

The sentence structure is on the hearing from their point of view, so, obviously it would be supernatural hearing, and thus, they received the interpretation of tongues. "8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?" As I've mentioned before, I've seen this happen in Arizona.

Also, God is not a God of confusion and wouldn't make a rule He's already broken. 1 Corinthians 14:2. Are you aware that 1 Corinthians was written around 15 years before Acts was written. Those reading it, knew how to read it.

Good night, for now.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Scripturally, that would be the outpouring at Pentecost. Acts chapter two. (obviously)
It differs from the other four in that the unknown tongue being spoken is in the language of the hearer. Why do you disagree? (if you still do)

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

Adding a scripture to my last post.

"8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?"

Three disciples speaking French, German and Russian. A Spaniard hears Spanish. An American hears English. A man from Japan hears Japanese. "8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?"

 

[Saint Steven]

The sentence structure is on the hearing from their point of view, so, obviously it would be supernatural hearing, and thus, they received the interpretation of tongues. "8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?" As I've mentioned before, I've seen this happen in Arizona.

Also, God is not a God of confusion and wouldn't make a rule He's already broken. 1 Corinthians 14:2. Are you aware that 1 Corinthians was written around 15 years before Acts was written. Those reading it, knew how to read it.

Good night, for now.

Yup. That's the point on which we disagree.
You have failed to prove your point to me on "supernatural hearing".
One atypical current example and some questionable scriptural "proof-texts" are simply not enough. Sorry.

Good night to you as well. Thanks.

 

[Saint Steven]

Adding a scripture to my last post.

"8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?"

Three disciples speaking French, German and Russian. A Spaniard hears Spanish. An American hears English. A man from Japan hears Japanese. "8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?"

There are two ways to interpret that scripture.
And no compelling evidence to choose your theory as correct.

And isn't your theory dependent on one heavenly language being spoken?
The term "other tongues" is plural. See scripture below.

Acts 2:4
All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to
speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

 

[ARBITER01]

That's interesting. Did you write that, or do you have a source to cite?

My understanding is that interpretation of tongues is preferable, but not mandatory.
The Apostle says a message in tongues isn't edifying, not forbidden. Interpretation of tongues is the most difficult manifestation to stipulate. The person speaking the tongues doesn't know if they will have an accompanying interpretation. And there may not be anyone else in the congregation that can interpret. You just have to move on.

Frankly, I am edified by tongues whether there is interpretation or not.
Just to bask in the glow of a manifestation of the Spirit is fine by me.

Not sure why you divide up tongues as you have.
Are not all "signs" also "gifts"? When is a sign not a gift? (manifestation)

Also dangerously close to agreement with Cessationism. Which claims that the gifts were given as initial signs. Once this was accomplished they were no longer needed. I realize that you aren't claiming that.

This is how I define tongues. (my writing)
There may be more, but this is the basic scriptural list.

Five Different kinds of tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in the Spirit
3) Prophetic prayer language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in the Spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

There are two types of tongues listed in the bible from the gift of tongues, a personal prayer tongue and a corporate tongue. That's it.

The gift of tongues is not in an understandable language. The Holy Spirit was not lying through Paul when He said...

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Yup. That's the point on which we disagree.
You have failed to prove your point to me on "supernatural hearing".
One atypical current example and some questionable scriptural "proof-texts" are simply not enough. Sorry.

Good night to you as well. Thanks.

Your's contradicts scripture, mine upholds it.