When should we use tongues as a sign to unbelievers?

[topher694]

Do you think interpretation is always required as @ARBITER01 asserts? I've heard stories of situations similar to Acts 2 where people would hear a Christian speak their native tongue and would be impressed, but in those situations there is no intermediate interpreter involved.

Interpretation is one form of tongues, there are others, each important and effective for different situations. Just this past week, my wife was singing in tongues and according to a member of our congregation she was singing in Hebrew, she had no idea at the time, but it had meaning to him, and later after he explained it to us it carried meaning for the church as well. All were edified by it.

 

[ARBITER01]

Interpretation is one form of tongues, there are others, each important and effective for different situations. Just this past week, my wife was singing in tongues and according to a member of our congregation she was singing in Hebrew, she had no idea at the time, but it had meaning to him, and later after he explained it to us it carried meaning for the church as well. All were edified by it.

Edit: Not to spark an argument, it had to be the interpretation gift operating since it was human languages.

 

[topher694]

Edit: Not to spark an argument, it had to be the interpretation gift operating since it was human languages.

We've been around this before and I've come to the conclusion we just have different ways of describing the same thing. Which is fine. All that really matters is that we were obedient and God's will was done.

 

[tturt]

Tongues aren't always interpreted. Scripture says may interpret (I Cor 14:13).

When the tongues are the native language of a listener, there wouldn't be a need for interpretatiom.

Sometimes after giving the message in tongues - up to 3 times -
"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." I Cor 14:28

How can there be no interpreter ? Sometimes a believer who hasn't been given an interpretation earlier, is dealing with things because they want to be sure that they are hearing the Holy Spirit perfectly. Surrounding believers need to be encouraging not condemning. (This applies to prophesying as well).

Sometimes people will say the interpretation was much longer or shorter than the message in tongues. So.?!! It's interpretation not translation.
.

 

[ARBITER01]

We've been around this before and I've come to the conclusion we just have different ways of describing the same thing. Which is fine. All that really matters is that we were obedient and God's will was done.

That's fine.

I can only go off of what The Holy Spirit teaches me. If there is another aspect of tongues I need to learn, He will show me like He has for just about 30 years.

 

[ARBITER01]

Tongues aren't always interpreted. Scripture says may interpret (I Cor 14:13).

When the tongues are the native language of a listener, there wouldn't be a need for interpretatiom. Also, there's practical application. Sometimes a believer who hasn't been given an interpretation earlier, is dealing with things because they want to be sure that they are hearing the Holy Spirit perfectly. Surrounding believers need to be encouraging not condemning. (This applies to prophesying as well). Sometimes people will say the interpretation was much longer or shorter than the message in tongues. So.?!! It's interpretation not translation.
.

Corporate tongues, if they are Holy Spirit spoken tongues, are always to be interpreted in the congregation.

I'm not sure why you are trying to change the subject.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

That's fine.

I can only go off of what The Holy Spirit teaches me. If there is another aspect of tongues I need to learn, He will show me like He has for just about 30 years.

My apologies for chiming in, but I'm really curious about how this whole thing of receiving private doctrinal lessons from The Holy Spirit really works. When I study controversial doctrinal issues, my typical approach consists of hearing different positions, weighing their arguments, asking feedback from different people about my own interpretation, and after some time I eventually arrive at some view on the topic that I personally find the most convincing. But if I could receive private doctrinal lessons from the Holy Spirit instead, that would be hands down the way to go. I mean, you cannot be wrong if God Himself is teaching you the right doctrines.

 

[Hark]

1 Corinthians 14:22:

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. [KJV]

22 so that the tongues are for a sign, not to the believing, but to the unbelieving; and the prophesy [is] not for the unbelieving, but for the believing, [YLT]

22 So then, tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is not for unbelievers, but for those who believe. [NASB]
​

Tongues seem to serve multiple functions:

• For private prayer.
• For worship (singing in tongues).
• For prophecy (when interpreted by someone with the gift of interpretation).
• As a sign to unbelievers (the topic of this thread).

Question: In what circumstances is it appropriate to speak in an unlearned tongue in front of an unbeliever as a sign to them? And a "sign" of what? Why would an unbeliever be impressed if one speaks in tongues in front of them?

As per the event at Pentecost, to hear the wonderful works of God in their native foreign tongue by a believer that does not speak their language. That is how tongues becomes a sign to them, but not always perceived as such if another different foreigner present does not understand that native tongue being spoken to a nearby foreigner for why he would think the believer was drunk.

1 Corinthians 14:21 testify what God's gift of tongues really is; of other men's lips to speak unto the people.

That said; 1 Corinthians 12:4-14 and especially 1 Corinthians 12:19-21 is why tongues can never be for private use, claiming they need no interpretation thus no need of an interpreter and yet Paul said when he speaks in tongues, he prays that somebody will interpret so that tongue will be fruitful to himself.

1 Corinthians 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. 13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 15 What 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.

To turn tongues around from speaking unto the people and just be a means to pray back to God would be an act of confusion which God is not the author of.

Indeed, for all the supposed claims of using tongues in private, yet without interpretation, how can any modern tongue speaker know what benefit that is being done when Paul could not know unless it was interpreted?

That is why that whole chapter was about if any sought a spiritual gift, to seek the gift of prophesy per 1 Corinthians 14:1-2 and began comparing tongues against prophesy to illustrate that tongues was never a stand alone gift for why interpretations was needed for the tongue speaker to understand for that tongue to be fruitful to himself.

Indeed, if the readers had read 1 Corinthians 12:19-21 before the 14th chapter, they would not read otherwise thinking tongues can be for private use.

John 16:13 in all Bible versions testify that the Holy Spirit cannot speak from Himself but speaks what He hears, but the truth is not always maintained in modern Bibles when it comes to Romans 8:26-27 because most imply groans can be uttered whereas the KJV and a few modern Bibles testify that not even His groanings can be uttered.

So how can the Holy Spirit turn God's gift of tongues from speaking unto the people as a sign to unbelievers in hearing the wonderful works of God in their native tongue to be used by the Holy Spirit supposedly in uttering His prayers in gibberish nonsense back to God? John 16:13 says He can't.

And the idea that it is in a secret language so the devil does not know what was prayed for, is giving too much credit to the devil as if he is 'lord" when the Book of Job is about how the devil cannot do anything without God's permission.

So if a believer believes the lie that they can receive the holy Spirit again apart from salvation by a sign of tongues or with evidence of tongues, then that is why it is not the real God's gift of tongues for why it's not coming with any interpretation nor understood by any foreigner.

Isaiah 8:19 testify of how the occult can speak in a pagan supernatural tongue for why God's gift of tongues would never be gibberish nonsense to be assumed for private use just because it comes with no interpretation.

In idolatry in Rome, priests in their respective temple can speak in gibberish nonsense in prayers for the idolator and then they would translate the answer from that "god" to the one paying for that service.

That is why God's gift of tongues can never be for private use and why the apostle John wanted believers to test the spirits as well as the tongues they bring because it is just gibberish nonsense. Any spirit coming over the believer when the Jesus Christ is in us is that spirit of antichrist ( 1 John 4:1-4 ) for why that tongue is gibberish nonsense in speaking as the world speaks in their pagan supernatural tongue per 1 John 4:5-6 for why even that supernatural tongue is to be tested too.

Speaking in gibberish nonsense to an unbeliever which is not in his native tongue nor any other foreign language will hardly serve as a sign to any unbelievers. They will just think the believer is "mad".

Believe it or not, some believers have used tongues as a sign of God calling them into the ministry, but yet as the OP testify, tongues are not to serve as a sign to believers for anything; only to unbelievers.

 

[topher694]

As per the event at Pentecost, to hear the wonderful works of God in their native foreign tongue by a believer that does not speak their language. That is how tongues becomes a sign to them, but not always perceived as such if another different foreigner present does not understand that native tongue being spoken to a nearby foreigner for why he would think the believer was drunk.

1 Corinthians 14:21 testify what God's gift of tongues really is; of other men's lips to speak unto the people.

That said; 1 Corinthians 12:4-14 and especially 1 Corinthians 12:19-21 is why tongues can never be for private use, claiming they need no interpretation thus no need of an interpreter and yet Paul said when he speaks in tongues, he prays that somebody will interpret so that tongue will be fruitful to himself.

1 Corinthians 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. 13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 15 What 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.

To turn tongues around from speaking unto the people and just be a means to pray back to God would be an act of confusion which God is not the author of.

Indeed, for all the supposed claims of using tongues in private, yet without interpretation, how can any modern tongue speaker know what benefit that is being done when Paul could not know unless it was interpreted?

That is why that whole chapter was about if any sought a spiritual gift, to seek the gift of prophesy per 1 Corinthians 14:1-2 and began comparing tongues against prophesy to illustrate that tongues was never a stand alone gift for why interpretations was needed for the tongue speaker to understand for that tongue to be fruitful to himself.

Indeed, if the readers had read 1 Corinthians 12:19-21 before the 14th chapter, they would not read otherwise thinking tongues can be for private use.

John 16:13 in all Bible versions testify that the Holy Spirit cannot speak from Himself but speaks what He hears, but the truth is not always maintained in modern Bibles when it comes to Romans 8:26-27 because most imply groans can be uttered whereas the KJV and a few modern Bibles testify that not even His groanings can be uttered.

So how can the Holy Spirit turn God's gift of tongues from speaking unto the people as a sign to unbelievers in hearing the wonderful works of God in their native tongue to be used by the Holy Spirit supposedly in uttering His prayers in gibberish nonsense back to God? John 16:13 says He can't.

And the idea that it is in a secret language so the devil does not know what was prayed for, is giving too much credit to the devil as if he is 'lord" when the Book of Job is about how the devil cannot do anything without God's permission.

So if a believer believes the lie that they can receive the holy Spirit again apart from salvation by a sign of tongues or with evidence of tongues, then that is why it is not the real God's gift of tongues for why it's not coming with any interpretation nor understood by any foreigner.

Isaiah 8:19 testify of how the occult can speak in a pagan supernatural tongue for why God's gift of tongues would never be gibberish nonsense to be assumed for private use just because it comes with no interpretation.

In idolatry in Rome, priests in their respective temple can speak in gibberish nonsense in prayers for the idolator and then they would translate the answer from that "god" to the one paying for that service.

That is why God's gift of tongues can never be for private use and why the apostle John wanted believers to test the spirits as well as the tongues they bring because it is just gibberish nonsense. Any spirit coming over the believer when the Jesus Christ is in us is that spirit of antichrist ( 1 John 4:1-4 ) for why that tongue is gibberish nonsense in speaking as the world speaks in their pagan supernatural tongue per 1 John 4:5-6 for why even that supernatural tongue is to be tested too.

Speaking in gibberish nonsense to an unbeliever which is not in his native tongue nor any other foreign language will hardly serve as a sign to any unbelievers. They will just think the believer is "mad".

Believe it or not, some believers have used tongues as a sign of God calling them into the ministry, but yet as the OP testify, tongues are not to serve as a sign to believers for anything; only to unbelievers.

The above is what is gibberish. And, imo, not in the spirit of this thread nor this forum.

 

[Hark]

The above is what is gibberish. And, imo, not in the spirit of this thread nor this forum.

When referring to the real God's gift of tongues and when it is not, this is adhering to the topic's question regarding God's gift of tongues serving as a sign to unbelievers, and that is when they understand what is being said in their native tongue BUT not as the world' speaks in their pagan supernatural tongue which will always be gibberish nonsense as Isaiah 8:19 confirms.

So pagan's supernatural tongue which is gibberish nonsense will hardly serve as a sign to any unbeliever.

 

[ARBITER01]

My apologies for chiming in, but I'm really curious about how this whole thing of receiving private doctrinal lessons from The Holy Spirit really works. When I study controversial doctrinal issues, my typical approach consists of hearing different positions, weighing their arguments, asking feedback from different people about my own interpretation, and after some time I eventually arrive at some view on the topic that I personally find the most convincing. But if I could receive private doctrinal lessons from the Holy Spirit instead, that would be hands down the way to go. I mean, you cannot be wrong if God Himself is teaching you the right doctrines.

I can only try to explain how The Holy Spirit operates in me.

It's a combination of scripture, revelation, and experience where possible. I sought out The Holy Spirit because I wasn't receiving a straight answer from people on things I needed to know after I was born again. Books could be wrong, obviously people and their opinions were wrong at times, and in some services they could be doing things wrong also.

For instance,... I could ask The Holy Spirit if Topher is right about an event he is describing or something. I would look upwards and address Him as if I was talking to another. I would just ask Him to show me if this was true and help me understand it if was so. After that I could receive a revelation insight or I could be led to a specific scripture passage or scholar I have in a computer program I use for studying, or it might take a little while for Him to teach me by experience, such as watching a similar event happening in my church. Or He would just tell me He is always wrong,.. lol

It's not just scripture knowledge that I may need, I ask Him about many things throughout the day at times. I might have a thought that appears somewhat correct, so I will ask Him to witness to that thought somehow if it is true or remove the thought if it isn't.

Revelation also includes a leading inside spiritually. I may have a instant knowledge about something and also the leading/desire to look up a passage in the bible. I will just know inside that I need to look up a passage or get online and look something up I seen before, etc, etc. It includes a process of discovery.

On a side note, you've been asking questions on here since around 2011 Truth,.....just saying.

 

[topher694]

When referring to the real God's gift of tongues and when it is not, this is adhering to the topic's question regarding God's gift of tongues serving as a sign to unbelievers, and that is when they understand what is being said in their native tongue BUT not as the world' speaks in their pagan supernatural tongue which will always be gibberish nonsense as Isaiah 8:19 confirms.

So pagan's supernatural tongue which is gibberish nonsense will hardly serve as a sign to any unbeliever.

What authority do you have to speak on the matter? Why should anyone listen to you? All I see is contradictions and name-calling.

 

[Hark]

What authority do you have to speak on the matter? Why should anyone listen to you? All I see is contradictions and name-calling.

I do not see any name calling, brother.

And scripture has been posted. The authority of the scripture is in play; not me.

You can do your own research for the existence of pagan's supernatural tongue in existing before Pentecost like Khundalini, which is an Eastern Mysticism, but I would think Isaiah 8:19 is proof enough as it is found in the occult.

 

[topher694]

I do not see any name calling, brother.

And scripture has been posted. The authority of the scripture is in play; not me.

You can do your own research for the existence of pagan's supernatural tongue in existing before Pentecost like Khundalini, which is an Eastern Mysticism, but I would think Isaiah 8:19 is proof enough as it is found in the occult.

Hiding behind scripture to call people names is still name calling... in fact it is worse. You know full well there are Christians who believe in one form of tongues as a personal prayer language to God suggesting they are pagan and speaking gibberish, especially in this forum IS name calling or worse.

I noticed you completely ignored my question, just like you've completely ignored the full context 1 Cor 14:2. I'm going to go ahead and take that as you do not have any tangible experience nor authority to speak on the matter. Therefore there is zero reason anyone should take what you are saying seriously.

 

[ARBITER01]

To turn tongues around from speaking unto the people and just be a means to pray back to God would be an act of confusion which God is not the author of.

Indeed, for all the supposed claims of using tongues in private, yet without interpretation, how can any modern tongue speaker know what benefit that is being done when Paul could not know unless it was interpreted?

Here are the forum rules,..

House Rules:
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Terms of Service and Christian Forum Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against its theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

You're not allowed to teach against our theology here. If you don't agree with it, then it would probably be better to find another forum section to post in instead.

 

[Hark]

Here are the forum rules,..

House Rules:
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Terms of Service and Christian Forum Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against its theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

I believe you corrected a member about how the Holy Spirit does not leave us. I did not see him accept that correction and so is he still in this faith group? Or how does he feel about you? Just pointing out that sometimes I see what I think are accepted members by you, but are not always in agreement about what you all believe.

You're not allowed to teach against our theology here. If you don't agree with it, then it would probably be better to find another forum section to post in instead.

A couple of questions.

I believe every believer is always Spirit-filled since salvation.

I do not believe the gifts of the Spirit have ceased. I believe in the gift of discerning of spirits & using scripture by His help to show that discernment.

Does that goes contrary to this faith group?

Or can you show me exactly what this faith group believes as in an official statement for why you think I am not to be in this faith group?

Never mind.

Obviously there is no iron sharpening iron here as evidence of the Lord's ministry from my part to others or from others to me to allay my valid Biblical concerns so I shall leave this "faith group". It is obvious we do not speak the same thing nor hold to the same judgment.

I hope you have a Merry Christmas, brother.

 

[topher694]

You know... as a personal, random observation, I'm all for questions and debate and challenging fellow Christians in a respectful way, that is one of the ways we can grow. However, when one becomes so entrenched in their personal beliefs that they begin to call others things like, "false" or "pagan" or "unbiblical" or something similar, imo they've crossed a line that opens the door for a greater level of scrutiny and challenge of their statements and their character. i.e. what type of authority do you have to make such a claim about fellow believers? In such cases "the Bible says" simply doesn't cut it, because both sides are claiming "the Bible says", however one side has now gone beyond that into accusations.

In other words, it's one thing to have a discussion saying, "I believe/don't believe xyz". It's another to say "xyz is pagan/false/unbiblical" when xyz is a commonly debated Christian concept.

What I see more often than not in such situations is the accuser has zero foundation to stand upon, zero fruit to back up their accusations, and often zero experience to validate their interpretations. In the end all they usually have is their own personal opinion about scripture (which is fine) and a nasty, prideful attitude about it (which is not).

ok, random observation over.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

My understanding of this verse is somewhat different. I just look at the context of the passage.
It is not a sign to (toward) anyone. It is a sign OF them. How they react to the manifestation of unknown tongues tells you something about who they are - specifically whether they are believers or not.


1 Corinthians 14:22-23 KJV
22. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to (of) them that believe, but to (of) them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
23. If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

This is talking about how the hearer reacts to the speaking in unknown tongues.

• If they act shocked or amazed and question the sanity of the speaker, then they are likely unbelievers or perhaps unlearned believers. They simply do not know what is happening.
• If they act as if nothing odd is happening, then they are knowledgeable believers. They know what is going on.

So IMHO, the passage is talking about a sign of who is an unbeliever (or unknowledgeable).

I welcome opinions.

 

[Guojing]

My understanding of this verse is somewhat different. I just look at the context of the passage.
It is not a sign to (toward) anyone. It is a sign OF them. How they react to the manifestation of unknown tongues tells you something about who they are - specifically whether they are believers or not.


1 Corinthians 14:22-23 KJV
22. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to (of) them that believe, but to (of) them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
23. If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

This is talking about how the hearer reacts to the speaking in unknown tongues.

• If they act shocked or amazed and question the sanity of the speaker, then they are likely unbelievers or perhaps unlearned believers. They simply do not know what is happening.
• If they act as if nothing odd is happening, then they are knowledgeable believers. They know what is going on.

So IMHO, the passage is talking about a sign of who is an unbeliever (or unknowledgeable).

I welcome opinions.

Interesting, initially, you made me think the KJV also use the word of instead of to.

How come you change the words there?

 

[tturt]

The languages referenced in post #39 are unknown to those hearing them but primarily not inspired by the Holy Spirit nor the language resulting.

The disciples, the women including Mary, and other believers obeyed Jesus' instructions. They waited for the promise of the Father. They were surrendered, abandoning their agendas. Prayerfully they were on one accord even when conducting business.

To believers:
"And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me." Acts 1:4 "For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost..." Acts 1:5

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me ... unto the uttermost part of the earth." Acts 1:8 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost

since this thread is about tongues - "...and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:4