Tongues, a different view.

[Saint Steven]

Do we get it wrong when interpreting the events that took place on Pentecost? Did each of the 12 Apostles supernaturally speak an unlearned human language? Understood by most of the audience in their native tongue? (The common view). Or did each pray aloud in only one heavenly tongue, not human, to God? And foreigners in the audience each heard the single heavenly language in their own native tongues?

According to Paul: “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

So, if they spoke in a heavenly tongue and not in a human tongue. And devout Jews (born again) from every nation understood them in their own native tongues. These must have received the gift of interpretation during the same outpouring.

That is, a heavenly language, not human, spoken to God. Overheard and interpreted in the native language of the hearer who also received the gift of interpretation of tongues at the same time.

Stressing this possibility is that some in the audience heard only gibberish. They heard the Heavenly tongue without interpretation.

Any thoughts?

This is interesting. Thanks for launching this thread.

I question the key scripture you are using. (in bold below) What does the context reveal?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 Corinthians 14:1-5
Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy.
2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God.
Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.
3 But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort.
4 Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church.
5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Verse 2 begins with the word "For" meaning it is pointing backwards at the previous verses. As if to say "because". So, that's a key consideration here.

So, the general subject here is prophecy, which is being compared to tongues.
What comparatives are given?

- (unlike prophecy) anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. - vs 2
- (unlike prophecy) no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit. - vs 2
- (unlike tongues) the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort. - vs 3

So, the purpose of this passage is not to describe tongues, it is to compare it to prophecy.

Furthermore, if tongues worked the way you are describing it, what need would there be for the interpretation of tongues?

1 Corinthians 14:5
I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.

 

[Alithis]

God's word does not lie, so we have to go to the rule, and see how the story fits to the rule. Acts 2 is the story. 1 Corinthians 14:2 is the rule.

1. Tongues are not speaking or preaching as some false doctrines teach, to MEN. Why?

2. No man understands them.

With the rules in your head, now go back and read the story.

We see they understood. So how do they hear? Naturally, or supernaturally? Go back to the rule, and add other gifts - interpretation of tongues. Simple.

not totally sure what you mean .. but the rule in Corinthians is a guide , not a law . pauls letter is a 2nd reply of three (we dont have the first) to letters and questions sent to him .
the rule he is presenting is solely in the context of a gathering of believers when all are together in one place and one who does not know whats going on is present . if that one who doesn't understand what is going on is not present -then that general guideline is in no way binding .. all can speak in tongues freely .but when they are present ..here is a good rule to follow so they dont think your all nuts ,etc .
..but as i said i am not fully following what you mean yet ..let the dialogue continue

 

[1stcenturylady]

not totally sure what you mean .. but the rule in Corinthians is a guide , not a law . pauls letter is a 2nd reply of three (we dont have the first) to letters and questions sent to him .
the rule he is presenting is solely in the context of a gathering of believers when all are together in one place and one who does not know whats going on is present . if that one who doesn't understand what is going on is not present -then that general guideline is in no way binding .. all can speak in tongues freely .but when they are present ..here is a good rule to follow so they dont think your all nuts ,etc .
..but as i said i am not fully following what you mean yet ..let the dialogue continue

BTW - you've got mail.

The devout Jews each heard their own language, not a cacophony of 120 different languages, so it was only through the interpretation of tongues that they would have been able to. That is not only what the rule says, but the story also. Go back to one of my recent posts in this thread that has Acts 2 color coded. I explained it there.

 

[Alithis]

BTW - you've got mail.

The devout Jews each heard their own language, not a cacophony of 120 different languages, so it was only through the interpretation of tongues that they would have been able to. That is not only what the rule says, but the story also. Go back to one of my recent posts in this thread that has Acts 2 color coded. I explained it there.

i'll take a look -thanks

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

That is my question as well, However only God understands it from what they tell me?

He understands ALL languages, so what is the point?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Paul tells us how tongues work. They are a heavenly language, not human, spoken to God. “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

The function of tongues on the Day of Pentecost was different to the tongues that Paul was basing his teaching on. The reality is that on the Day of Pentecost, at a definite place and time in history, a number of people got filled with the Holy Spirit, went out on the street and spoke the languages of all the regional dialects around Jerusalem. We know why it happened, but we don't know how when a group of people received tongues as part of the filling of the Holy Spirit, that they spoke all those languages which they themselves had never learned. Luke does not explain how that happened, because he didn't know himself, but he knew the purpose of the event: so that every representative person from the regions knew that God was making Himself real through the languages the Holy Spirit spoke through the upper room people. That was a one-off event.

1 Corinthians 14 is Paul's instruction about how and when to use tongues as a prayer language to fellowship in private with God, and not for public use.

 

[1stcenturylady]

The function of tongues on the Day of Pentecost was different to the tongues that Paul was basing his teaching on. The reality is that on the Day of Pentecost, at a definite place and time in history, a number of people got filled with the Holy Spirit, went out on the street and spoke the languages of all the regional dialects around Jerusalem. We know why it happened, but we don't know how when a group of people received tongues as part of the filling of the Holy Spirit, that they spoke all those languages which they themselves had never learned. Luke does not explain how that happened, because he didn't know himself, but he knew the purpose of the event: so that every representative person from the regions knew that God was making Himself real through the languages the Holy Spirit spoke through the upper room people. That was a one-off event.

1 Corinthians 14 is Paul's instruction about how and when to use tongues as a prayer language to fellowship in private with God, and not for public use.

God is not a God of confusion. The story in Acts 2 completely corresponds to 1 Corinthians 14. There is no contradiction, nor that the story was a stand alone event. And 1 Corinthians 14 shows the difference between our prayer language done alone, and the gift of tongues in conjunction with interpretation of tongues for the benefit of all. The interpretation of tongues is equal to prophecy and sometimes IS prophecy. Though prophecy can still be in a known language to all.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

God is not a God of confusion. The story in Acts 2 completely corresponds to 1 Corinthians 14. There is no contradiction, nor that the story was a stand alone event. And 1 Corinthians 14 shows the difference between our prayer language done alone, and the gift of tongues in conjunction with interpretation of tongues for the benefit of all. The interpretation of tongues is equal to prophecy and sometimes IS prophecy. Though prophecy can still be in a known language to all.

I differ in that the languages heard on the Day of Pentecost was not interpretation of tongues. For interpretation, there needs to be an interpreter. But there was none. The crowd actually heard their own languages directly from the speakers. There was no middle man to interpret for them. This was the unique miracle that happened on the Day of Pentecost.

Even the known languages that have been spoken when someone has spoken in tongues are not the same as what happened at Pentecost. The tongue spoken was the actual language, but being unlearned by the speaker that was a miracle in itself and happened for a particular purpose - to show that God is real and communicates to people in their own language.

We don't know whether the upper room people spoke the actual languages, or whether the miracle was in the hearing. But it makes no real difference actually. The outcome was that the crowd heard the upper room people speaking of the greatness of God in their own languages. There is no record anywhere that it ever happened again like that.

There's no confusion about it. God is being sovereign in that He can communicate to people any way He chooses. It is only when people misuse the gift that confusion arises, because there is no purpose in people praying publicly in tongues without interpretation.

 

[Alithis]

I differ in that the languages heard on the Day of Pentecost was not interpretation of tongues. For interpretation, there needs to be an interpreter. But there was none. The crowd actually heard their own languages directly from the speakers. There was no middle man to interpret for them. This was the unique miracle that happened on the Day of Pentecost.

Even the known languages that have been spoken when someone has spoken in tongues are not the same as what happened at Pentecost. The tongue spoken was the actual language, but being unlearned by the speaker that was a miracle in itself and happened for a particular purpose - to show that God is real and communicates to people in their own language.

We don't know whether the upper room people spoke the actual languages, or whether the miracle was in the hearing. But it makes no real difference actually. The outcome was that the crowd heard the upper room people speaking of the greatness of God in their own languages. There is no record anywhere that it ever happened again like that.

There's no confusion about it. God is being sovereign in that He can communicate to people any way He chooses. It is only when people misuse the gift that confusion arises, because there is no purpose in people praying publicly in tongues without interpretation.

yeah , i'm inclined to agree on this point . there are varying kinds of the manifestation of tongues . and the term miracles is a wide embracing term . something miraculous happened that day

 

[1stcenturylady]

I differ in that the languages heard on the Day of Pentecost was not interpretation of tongues. For interpretation, there needs to be an interpreter. But there was none. The crowd actually heard their own languages directly from the speakers. There was no middle man to interpret for them. This was the unique miracle that happened on the Day of Pentecost.

Even the known languages that have been spoken when someone has spoken in tongues are not the same as what happened at Pentecost. The tongue spoken was the actual language, but being unlearned by the speaker that was a miracle in itself and happened for a particular purpose - to show that God is real and communicates to people in their own language.

We don't know whether the upper room people spoke the actual languages, or whether the miracle was in the hearing. But it makes no real difference actually. The outcome was that the crowd heard the upper room people speaking of the greatness of God in their own languages. There is no record anywhere that it ever happened again like that.

There's no confusion about it. God is being sovereign in that He can communicate to people any way He chooses. It is only when people misuse the gift that confusion arises, because there is no purpose in people praying publicly in tongues without interpretation.

The devout Jews were the interpreters. It is the Spirit who draws, and the same Spirit gives gifts. This same thing happened in Arizona when I lived there. You even read about it in my book. I myself saw a vision before I repented. Don't limit God. He will use whatever He wants to save someone and get their attention.

 

[Dave L]

The function of tongues on the Day of Pentecost was different to the tongues that Paul was basing his teaching on. The reality is that on the Day of Pentecost, at a definite place and time in history, a number of people got filled with the Holy Spirit, went out on the street and spoke the languages of all the regional dialects around Jerusalem. We know why it happened, but we don't know how when a group of people received tongues as part of the filling of the Holy Spirit, that they spoke all those languages which they themselves had never learned. Luke does not explain how that happened, because he didn't know himself, but he knew the purpose of the event: so that every representative person from the regions knew that God was making Himself real through the languages the Holy Spirit spoke through the upper room people. That was a one-off event.

1 Corinthians 14 is Paul's instruction about how and when to use tongues as a prayer language to fellowship in private with God, and not for public use.

We do not have scripture showing more than one gift of tongues. But the same gift of Tongues allowed for prayer and became a sign to the unrepentant Jews of looming judgement. And everything in between.

 

[Dave L]

This is interesting. Thanks for launching this thread.

I question the key scripture you are using. (in bold below) What does the context reveal?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 Corinthians 14:1-5
Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy.
2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God.
Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.
3 But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort.
4 Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church.
5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Verse 2 begins with the word "For" meaning it is pointing backwards at the previous verses. As if to say "because". So, that's a key consideration here.

So, the general subject here is prophecy, which is being compared to tongues.
What comparatives are given?

- (unlike prophecy) anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. - vs 2
- (unlike prophecy) no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit. - vs 2
- (unlike tongues) the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort. - vs 3

So, the purpose of this passage is not to describe tongues, it is to compare it to prophecy.

Furthermore, if tongues worked the way you are describing it, what need would there be for the interpretation of tongues?

1 Corinthians 14:5
I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.

I believe Paul defines tongues as being a heavenly language, and then compares it to prophecy. But this brings up another point. Tongues edifies the speaker. Prophecy edifies the hearers. Why because understanding what is said edifies. So the tongue speaker understood what they were saying in the heavenly tongue, in order to be edified. But they must translate it , or interpret it so others could understand.

 

[Kiterius]

Do we get it wrong when interpreting the events that took place on Pentecost? Did each of the 12 Apostles supernaturally speak an unlearned human language? Understood by most of the audience in their native tongue? (The common view). Or did each pray aloud in only one heavenly tongue, not human, to God? And foreigners in the audience each heard the single heavenly language in their own native tongues?

According to Paul: “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

So, if they spoke in a heavenly tongue and not in a human tongue. And devout Jews (born again) from every nation understood them in their own native tongues. These must have received the gift of interpretation during the same outpouring.

That is, a heavenly language, not human, spoken to God. Overheard and interpreted in the native language of the hearer who also received the gift of interpretation of tongues at the same time.

Stressing this possibility is that some in the audience heard only gibberish. They heard the Heavenly tongue without interpretation.

Any thoughts?

On the day of Pentecost, the apostles spoke in human languages known to others who had assembled.

 

[Dave L]

i think it is BOTH ..or all three .. some heard unintelligible language ,some heard their own language some heard another language not their own but recognized it .. sis all people hear all of them in their own tongue .. i don't think so , i don't know i wasn't there

but its would not be out of line with scripture to suggest some heard unintelligible language .when GOD spoke from heaven and said to Jesus "I have glorified it and will glorify it again" many heard the word and OTHERS said it thundered .. some hear words others heard thunder .

The question remains if they spoke actual human languages? Or a single heavenly language those with the gift of interpretation each heard in their own dialect? Paul suggests the latter. “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

 

[Dave L]

On the day of Pentecost, the apostles spoke in human languages known to others who had assembled.

“For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

 

[Kiterius]

“For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (1 Corinthians 14:2) (KJV 1900)

Okay Del, so... what's your point?

 

[Dave L]

Okay Del, so... what's your point?

The devout Jews (born again) who heard the heavenly tongue must have received the gift of tongues interpretation too.

 

[Kiterius]

The devout Jews (born again) who heard the heavenly tongue must have received the gift of tongues interpretation too.

They heard known human languages Del. Each understood their own being spoken.

 

[Dave L]

They heard known human languages Del. Each understood their own being spoken.

But Paul says tongues are not human languages.

 

[Kiterius]

But Paul says tongues are not human languages.

Er... no. What he does do is to expand the definition of tongues beyond just human languages.