Tongues...probably everyone has already discussed this, but...

[Mathetes the kerux]

Understanding the Spirit

Notice the use of the single word - Spirit.

Why is this important: Because of the four sequential ways by which the Spirit comes. First is by faith and.... As it is neither subject of this thread nor short in explanation, I'll put that on the shelve.

The fullness of the Spirit standing before the Throne - Rev. 4:5 is also the seven Spirits of God sent to the earth - Rev. 5:6. They are sent to the earth because the Spirit, alongside the Water and Blood, testify on earth.

Prophet Isaiah prophesied of this fullness that we Jesus Christ had while on earth.
Isaiah 11:2
And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD.

Notice the seven spirits:

1. The Spirit of the LORD (which explanation I said in above to shelve)
2. The spirit of wisdom
3. The spirit of understanding
4. The spirit of counsel
5. The spirit of might
6. The spirit of knowledge
7. The spirit of the fear of the LORD.

There is a reason for the pairing of spirits starting from #2 thru 7 above, but again, that is another subject of lengthy explanation and for the "matured".

Compare gifts of the Spirit to above and see for yourselves how they are sourced.

I want to draw your attention to Isaiah 11:3 to see what the fullness of the Spirit immediately gave Jesus:

And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of the eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears...
​

The Spirit immediately gave Jesus UNDERSTANDING to foreclose having to judge with his physical senses of sight and hearing with the ear.

In the same way, when we receive the Spirit, the first thing He shoots for is to establish our UNDERSTANDING so that what we see and hear physically (including any unknown language) is foreclosed with spiritual UNDERSTANDING.

This is the light with which Apostle wrote about speaking with an unknown tongue and having to understand what the Spirit says. Only in understanding is there profitability. Therefore, I submit once again, that the Spirit WILL NOT give an unknown tongue to any man without securing his/her understanding in one way or the other.

Our spirit is created after the image and likeness of God's spirit - meaning, we are supposed to have an image of same faculties He has.

I am sorry if the post is lengthy - it is not to present anything in parables, but I believe it is necessary to explain a bit more for the benefit of those who might have problems understanding "loaded" statements and words.

Only in understanding is there profitabilty? Um . . . that directly contradicts what Paul says! The speaker has NO idea what he/she says . . . yet for them personally it is edifying. Can't be much clearer than that.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Grace and peace unto you, bstow!


Good! But let us render that verse (1 Cor. 14:2) without input from interpreters:

For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.​

The word "unknown" was put there by interpreters.

• 1. The tongue spoken by such a man may be, as I have posted earlier, the pure language of God spoken through him by the Spirit.
  2. The tongue spoken by such a man may be, in fact, the language spoken by the people around yet. Yet, they cannot understand what is being said. Here is an example: Our Lord Jesus Christ spoke to Jews about the mysteries of the kingdom of God in their (Jewish) language (tongue). They heard Him with their physical ears but could not understand (a spiritual faculty) the mysteries. Mysteries were given only for the disciples (and now unto all sons of the kingdom) to understand and they were/are edified. We all know that our Lord Jesus Christ spoke in the Spirit.

If there is no interprepation meant for others present with him, I guarantee you that the Spirit will give understanding unto the one through whom He is speaking. In understanding is the man edified.

Edification is a profit unto the man. How can a man be edified in a thing he does not understand? He cannot!

Edification is a profit unto many that hear a prophesy. They are edified because they understand what is being prophesied.

You are always a blessing!

Alright "no one" (oudeis ?) means NO ONE. NOT ONE UNDERSTANDS. Understanding is ONLY granted by the Spirit (hence the GIFT of interpretation) . . . and that is ONLY needed in the assembly since the usage is for edification OF THE BODY (in corporate).

If the tongue is spoken while alone . . . there is NO NEED for interpretation (but this doesn't mean that there won't be one . . . just that there doesn't have to be) and, watch this . . . THE ONE IS STILL EDIFIED yet there is NO understanding!

 

[Dave01]

In Acts 2 those who heard and understood were the interpreters.

However, you guys go ahead with the discussion. This is one I withdraw from.

Well, that view here has no scripture support saying that there were people there interpreting what they said over in acts 2.

I'm not placing you on the firing line here, I'm just pointing out that the people around them heard them clearly in all these different natural languages that they spoke.

 

[Dave01]

dkbwarrior:
Grace and peace from God and His Christ to you!

Yes, I understand why you can be lost because of length of posts. I'll try my best now to make it concise.

Now, here is the summary about the language (tongue):

1. There is a pure language of God with which He speaks and He gives by faith (as a promise) for the generation of eternal life - Zeph. 3:8-9.
2. Because it is by faith, we receive as a promise. And because it comes by faith, the Spirit manifests that promised language in part through the gifts of the Spirit - some (as the Spirit decides) are able to speak, some (as the Spirit decides) are able to understand.
3. The pure language (tongue) has its two-fold purpose:
   • To be used in calling the name of the LORD
   • To bring all who use the language in one consent (mind) - that is, to unite all.

Summary as it relates to praying IN the Spirit:

1. When the Spirit is in someone, whatever the person does is said to be in the Spirit.
2. The Spirit takes predominance, by default, over the spirit of the man. In prayer/worship/singing, the Spirit prays/worships/sings through the man in the pure language.
3. The man praying can be heard in one of two ways:
   • In the pure language of the Spirit - that MUST be interpreted. That is why Paul one who speaks in an unknown tongue must also pray for interpretation.
   • In his own language - because the Spirit gives him immediate understanding of what He is saying in his (man's) language. This is what happened in Acts 2 when the Spirit spoke through the disciples and they were heard speaking in their native Galilaeans.

Summary of praying WITH the Spirit:

1. Praying alongside with the Spirit and agreeing with what He prays about.
2. If the Spirit speaks and the man praying with Him does not understand, the Spirit is like a barbarian to him and it is fruitless.
3. So, the Spirit speaks and gives understanding at the same time. It becomes profitable to the man WITH whom the Spirit prays.

Summary of why there MUST be understanding:

1. The Spirit is given to profit EVERY MAN - 1 Cor. 12:7.
2. When one or more do not profit from what the Spirit speaks, it is NOT from the Spirit of God. Reason is that if it were so, 1 Cor. 12:7 will be in vain, which says: "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal".
3. If I speak in a tongue and there is no interpretation, it is unprofitable to me and it cannot be of the Spirit... as the Spirit will not go against what He gave Paul to write in 1 Cor. 12:7.

Summary about any tongue (language) spoken:

1. It must call upon the name of the LORD. The name of the LORD encompasses many things in the presence of the LORD.
2. It must bring all to whom it is spoken in one accord
3. It must profit EVERY MAN present - including the one speaking. And profitability comes foremost by understanding what is being said.

There is no biblical support/implication (I challenge anyone to bring forth) that speaking in an unknown tongue without understanding is a prayer language between God and the one speaking.

Second part (in subsequent post) shall explain what constitutes the Spirit for the benefit of those who do not know.

I've seen teaching like this before one time out of a person. That person was a oneness adherent I ran into on another board, who believed that unless The Holy Spirit came upon them to speak, they could not step out in faith and utilize the gift of tongues in their prayer language. And this seems to be what the guy is saying unless I'm viewing his amount of words incorrectly.

 

[JEBrady]

Alright "no one" (oudeis ?) means NO ONE. NOT ONE UNDERSTANDS. Understanding is ONLY granted by the Spirit (hence the GIFT of interpretation) . . . and that is ONLY needed in the assembly since the usage is for edification OF THE BODY (in corporate).

If the tongue is spoken while alone . . . there is NO NEED for interpretation (but this doesn't mean that there won't be one . . . just that there doesn't have to be) and, watch this . . . THE ONE IS STILL EDIFIED yet there is NO understanding!

Your series of posts were quite needed, and I just wanted to express my amen, my appreciation for your well-balanced and right-spirited response, and may God bless you and increase you.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Your series of posts were quite needed, and I just wanted to express my amen, my appreciation for your well-balanced and right-spirited response, and may God bless you and increase you.

No prob brother . . . we will see how he/she responds.

 

[Shawners]

..........
In Christ ,Shawners

 

[dkbwarrior]

Perhaps you should not draw such a clear line of demarcation.

Paul also says that the prayer tongue can be interpreted and not just (using your construct) the prophetic tongue.

I agree on your second statement. In fact, not only can the prayer tongue be interpreted, but on the other side of the coin, prophecy can also be prayer:

"Moreover David and the captains of the host separated... the sons of Jeduthun; ...under the hands of their father Jeduthun, who prophesied with a harp, to give thanks and to praise the LORD."
-I Chronicles 25:1,3

Here praise and thanksgiving are called 'prophecy' (in the psalmists sense) though both are given in the first person in the form of prayer.

Also, when John the Baptists father Zacharias' mouth was opened after the naming of John, the scriptures state that he was filled with the Holy Ghost and '...prophesied saying...'. What followed was a prayer of praise and thanksgiving in the form of first person prayer.

The thing to remember is that both prophecy as well as tongues are inspired utterances, the only difference is that one is in a language known to the speaker and the other is in a language that is not known to the speaker.

Prophecy happens to be predominately God speaking to man, while tongues are predominately man speaking to God. (After all, why have tongues and interpretation when one could just skip a step and prophecy?) But neither are just one way or the other.

Perhaps I will re-write my study guide to reflect this. However, the reason I left this information out of the guide originally was because of my desire to simplify the theology for the simple, or unlearned.

Peace...

 

[DreamerOfDreams]

Speaking in tongues is universal to all humans. We all have spirits, we all have movements within our spirirts that cannot be expressed with articulate words, and we all express these inexpressable spiritual movements with soundings that approximate the intuited meaning of those spiritual movements.

There is nothing supernatural about speaking with tongues. It is we ourselves attempting to express the inner movements of our spirits. The supernatural element only occurs when God via His divine power of discrenment hears our soundings and looks into our hearts to retrieve the meanings.

Tougues as the "prayer language" of our spirits is gibberish. The words have absolutely no meaning whatsoever outside of our own generation.

Of course none of this pertains to the Holy Spirit enabled "diversities of tongues."

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

I agree on your second statement. In fact, not only can the prayer tongue be interpreted, but on the other side of the coin, prophecy can also be prayer:

"Moreover David and the captains of the host separated... the sons of Jeduthun; ...under the hands of their father Jeduthun, who prophesied with a harp, to give thanks and to praise the LORD."
-I Chronicles 25:1,3

Here praise and thanksgiving are called 'prophecy' (in the psalmists sense) though both are given in the first person in the form of prayer.

Also, when John the Baptists father Zacharias' mouth was opened after the naming of John, the scriptures state that he was filled with the Holy Ghost and '...prophesied saying...'. What followed was a prayer of praise and thanksgiving in the form of first person prayer.

The thing to remember is that both prophecy as well as tongues are inspired utterances, the only difference is that one is in a language known to the speaker and the other is in a language that is not known to the speaker.

Prophecy happens to be predominately God speaking to man, while tongues are predominately man speaking to God. (After all, why have tongues and interpretation when one could just skip a step and prophecy?) But neither are just one way or the other.

Perhaps I will re-write my study guide to reflect this. However, the reason I left this information out of the guide originally was because of my desire to simplify the theology for the simple, or unlearned.

Peace...

We agree! Truly the broadest meaning of prophecy (in Greek) is ANY inspired utterance . . . in ANY direction . . . whether intelligible or unintelligible.

 

[Dave01]

Prophecy happens to be predominately God speaking to man, while tongues are predominately man speaking to God. (After all, why have tongues and interpretation when one could just skip a step and prophecy?) But neither are just one way or the other.

Care to clarify your statement here? Tongues and interpretation, while used in a service by The Holy Spirit, is GOD talking to us.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Care to clarify your statement here? Tongues and interpretation, while used in a service by The Holy Spirit, is GOD talking to us.

His statement is drawn from the discussion of Paul concerning the ontology of tongues. Paul says that one who speaks in tongues speaks to God. Paul also says he will pray with the S/spirit (tongues) and pray with the mind also; a reference to tongues used corporately for the interpretation of the prayer tongue gives a blessing to the hearer.
And then Paul goes on to say that one who speaks in a tongue, if there is no interpreter present, must keep silent and speak to himself and to God.

BUT there is also the hint of tongues being used by God to address the congregation in Pauls citation of Isaiah. God says "I will speak TO this people . . ." regardless of context of the Isaianic passage . . . the gist is a message FROM God.

So 1 Cor. 14 refers to three directions . . . the vertical expression of tongues (to God) and the horizontal expression of tongues (to another believer who partakes in the vertical expression) . . . and the inverted expression (where God addresses His people).

 

[Dave01]

His statement is drawn from the discussion of Paul concerning the ontology of tongues. Paul says that one who speaks in tongues speaks to God. Paul also says he will pray with the S/spirit (tongues) and pray with the mind also; a reference to tongues used corporately for the interpretation of the prayer tongue gives a blessing to the hearer.

Whoa wait a minute here, our prayer language, or the "speaking in mysteries" and "tongues of Angels" is not to be interepreted, because it is not done by The Holy Spirit, that is us stepping out in our faith and activating that gift.

I can do it at any place and anytime.

But the gift of tongues done by The Holy Spirit in a service is done by the anointing of The Holy Spirit, and the accompanying interpretation of it is by The Holy Spirit also.

Our prayer language is between GOD and us.

And then Paul goes on to say that one who speaks in a tongue, if there is no interpreter present, must keep silent and speak to himself and to God.

BUT there is also the hint of tongues being used by God to address the congregation in Pauls citation of Isaiah. God says "I will speak TO this people . . ." regardless of context of the Isaianic passage . . . the gist is a message FROM God.

So 1 Cor. 14 refers to three directions . . . the vertical expression of tongues (to God) and the horizontal expression of tongues (to another believer who partakes in the vertical expression) . . . and the inverted expression (where God addresses His people).

I'm not sure we are both on the same page here. Are you saying that our prayer language is to be interpreted somehow? If you are, I disagree.

 

[dkbwarrior]

Care to clarify your statement here? Tongues and interpretation, while used in a service by The Holy Spirit, is GOD talking to us.

We agree. It's simply a matter of semantics...

I said 'predominately' man speaking to God. I was referring simply to volume of words spoken. While there are millions of believers who practice their private prayer language daily, speaking probably trillions of words a day in tongues, their are a much MUCH smaller number of tongues w/interpretation to the congregation in the same time period.

I'm not at all saying that God cannot or does not speak to the congregation directly through the means of tongues and interpretation. As MtK said of Paul quoting from Isaiah, with 'other tongues' will God 'speak TO' His people.

Add to that Peter on the day of Pentecost saying "This is that" which the prophet Joel prophesied, "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy". Here also prophecy is used to describe tongues when they are understood, even though in this case their was no interpreter present.

I'm really enjoying this discussion by the way, it's helping me develop my Guide to the Holy Spirit.

Peace...

 

[dkbwarrior]

So 1 Cor. 14 refers to three directions . . . the vertical expression of tongues (to God) and the horizontal expression of tongues (to another believer who partakes in the vertical expression) . . . and the inverted expression (where God addresses His people).

That, my friend, is beautiful prose. May I use it?

Peace...

 

[dkbwarrior]

I'm not sure we are both on the same page here. Are you saying that our prayer language is to be interpreted somehow? If you are, I disagree.

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
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? 17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
-I Corinthians 14:13-17

The inference here is that the prayer language can and should be interpreted.

Kenneth Hagin made the statement that God would not ask one to pray for something that He would not grant. If one accepts that not everyone can operate in all of the gifts, then the 'interpretation' that all can pray for and all recieve is the 'interpretation' of the prayer language, not the gift that is elevated to the level of prophecy.

This is sometimes referred to as 'simple prophecy' as opposed to the 'gift of prophecy'. Its equal would be 'prayer tongues' as opposed to 'the gift of tongues'.

Peace...

 

[Dave01]

We agree. It's simply a matter of semantics...

I said 'predominately' man speaking to God. I was referring simply to volume of words spoken. While there are millions of believers who practice their private prayer language daily, speaking probably trillions of words a day in tongues, their are a much MUCH smaller number of tongues w/interpretation to the congregation in the same time period.

That is because the gift of interpretation is normally used by The Holy Spirit during a service. It is a lesser type gift because it is dependant upon a message given in tongues first by The Holy Spirit. The tongues message with the following interpretation is equal to prophesy.

I'm not at all saying that God cannot or does not speak to the congregation directly through the means of tongues and interpretation. As MtK said of Paul quoting from Isaiah, with 'other tongues' will God 'speak TO' His people.

Add to that Peter on the day of Pentecost saying "This is that" which the prophet Joel prophesied, "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy". Here also prophecy is used to describe tongues when they are understood, even though in this case their was no interpreter present.

I'm really enjoying this discussion by the way, it's helping me develop my Guide to the Holy Spirit.

Peace...

The reason there were no interpreters present as listed over in acts, was because of the particular type of tongue being utilized by The Holy Spirit at that moment. This was a tongue that was of a natural langauge being spoken. The people around them understood them in their own dialects, as written in scripture. This particular tongue still happens to this day.

 

[Dave01]

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
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? 17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
-I Corinthians 14:13-17

The inference here is that the prayer language can and should be interpreted.

Kenneth Hagin made the statement that God would not ask one to pray for something that He would not grant. If one accepts that not everyone can operate in all of the gifts, then the 'interpretation' that all can pray for and all recieve is the 'interpretation' of the prayer language, not the gift that is elevated to the level of prophecy.

This is sometimes referred to as 'simple prophecy' as opposed to the 'gift of prophecy'. Its equal would be 'prayer tongues' as opposed to 'the gift of tongues'.

Peace...

Here is what Jesus said about it,..

6 (EMTV) But you, whenever you pray, enter into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you openly.

I would seek further understanding in this area outside of Mr. Hagin. According to Jesus, prayer is not an open exercise in front of people, unless you do not want your prayers answered by GOD.

If you really want to see the gifts, spend some time at a good pentecostal church where The Holy Spirit is moving in the service. You will see all three of the vocal gifts in action and in orderly fashion. Everything should match to this scripture,..

26 ¶ (EMTV) What is it then, brothers? Whenever you come together, each of you has a song, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

That, my friend, is beautiful prose. May I use it?

Peace...

Sure.

I have been quoted before . . . not a problem.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

That is because the gift of interpretation is normally used by The Holy Spirit during a service. It is a lesser type gift because it is dependant upon a message given in tongues first by The Holy Spirit. The tongues message with the following interpretation is equal to prophesy.



The reason there were no interpreters present as listed over in acts, was because of the particular type of tongue being utilized by The Holy Spirit at that moment. This was a tongue that was of a natural langauge being spoken. The people around them understood them in their own dialects, as written in scripture. This particular tongue still happens to this day.

Actually the Greek plays out that the tongues spoken in Acts 2 were the same tongues that Paul refered to.

If you would like I can break down the Greek? The picture is that all the disciples spoke in ecstatic tongues while the listeners each heard in their own dialect.