Yet, another Tongues/Interpretation question

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

I've been attending a spirit-filled, AG church for about two years now, and I'm quite thankful for the church. I've been blessed, as I have heard many people speak in tongues, I have heard of powerful visions, and prophesies, and words of knowledge that was clearly from God. I've seen people baptized in the Spirit, and likewise, have been baptized in the spirit. I say all this to simply say that I know that God continues to work mightily, and that my church strives after God passionately.

I'm, however, beginning to have a few doubts about what I'm seeing in the church - in some regards. I have heard what have been called interpretations - but, as it is, with such a thing you can only accept it by faith (lest there be multiple of the same words being spoken, and other signs that follow it, in my opinion). But, to blindly accept what some call an interpretation can be quite dangerous. I can remember a time not too long ago that a word in tongues was given. A few moments later, someone began to speak the "interpretation" - only to be interrupted by another person who gave the "interpretation" - even though they said two different things.

I understand that our flesh tries to sneak in here and there, and we can often attribute our own hopes and desires as the voice of God. So, while it bothered me a bit, I didn't dwell too much on it. However, last night, I was reading a Bible commentary, and decided to read what it said concerning 1st Corinthians 14. I was a bit surprised, and thus, my question arises.

The following is from the commentary: "Perhaps you've been in church services where someone stands up and gives an utterance in tongues, followed by what is supposed to be an interpretation--a word to the congregation. I do not believe such an occurrence is proper understanding of tongues and interpretation. Paul says that a true interpretation of tongues will not be addressed to men, but to God (1cor. 14:2a). A true interpretation of tongues gives praise and adoration to the Father--not a message to the congregation. Go through the Book of Acts, and you will see that prophecy consists of words spoken to the congregation, while tongues and interpretation consists of praise to God."

So, my question is: have we actually been giving the correct interpretation when words of tongues have been given? And, what Biblical evidence is there for this? What Biblical evidence is there against what was stated in the commentary. Thanks and God bless.

Luke735 · Jun 20, 2007

To Zipster

First Corinthians 11 through 14 clearly lays down a structure for meeting together as a group. If I walked into any meeting of the early church I would expect to find the following:

1) They would have Songs or Music.
2) They would have a doctrine or sermon
3) They would have Tongues (2 or at the most 3)
4) They would have Interpretation of the Tongues. (Not Translation but interpretation)
5) They would have a revelation or prophecy. (2 or at the most 3)

1Co 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

1Co 14:27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
1Co 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
1Co 14:30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I wonder! prior to this letter being written what structure did meeting have?
Did they even have meetings. I believe they would have. I also believe they would have taken on this form or structure.
God obviously expressed the importance of this specific structure to the Corinthian Church.

1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
WOW the commandments of the Lord

1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. (CLEARLY TONGUES AND INTERPRETATION HAS A ROLL IN THE CHURCH SERVICE.
1Co 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

(What Order????)
The one just stated. Steps 1 through 5 ALL OF THEM.

FYI: Check out the Amplified version of 1 Thes 5:20

"Do not "spurn the gifts.

To spurn means to "doubt the authenticity"

Love

Luke 7:35

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

While, I certainly appreciate the time you took to reply, I don't see what you're saying as very relevant to what I asked.

There could be hundreds of words in tongues, and prophecies in a Church service, as far as I care. The more reign the Spirit of God has, the better.

What I care about is: is it accurate?

If the interpretation of tongues is a manifestation of the Spirit - which the Bible states it is - then the words spoken must be accurate. Would you say that the interpretations you hear should be regarded as infallible truth, and held with the same reverence as scripture? Should we record the interpretations, and call them God-breathed?

Because, if we are hearing the true interpretation of a word in tongues, then we should easily be able to say, "Yes" to that. But, I must re-state an observation I had: Two people giving interpretation to one tongue; one interrupting the other. Please, I'd like to know why I shouldn't doubt the authenticity of such an occurrence when witnessing the event brought confusion - and, as you quoted, "God is not the author of confusion."

I'm willing to guess that very few would be willing to say that the interpretations they hear could be regarded on the same level as the Bible.

As it is, my main question is about what I quoted from commentary.

The commentary states that there is no Biblical evidence that a message in tongues a word TO the church, like we so often think it is. This is where my interest lies - is there evidence supporting this? Evidence against?

tturt · Jun 20, 2007

In relationship to one person interpreting and someone else finishing - At this time, I've never received an interpretation but based on being around some people who do - it isn't a word for word interpretation; however, the main jest of each "sentence" is the same. Sometimes several people within the same congregation will know basically what is going to be said and most of the time there is someone who serves under that ministry that usually gives the interpretation. I have seen where 2 - 3 people would give portions to complete one interpretation. This can also happen when you have together several prophets or people who speak prophetically, the Lord will reveal different things about a nation, church, situation, person, etc. and as each one of them speaks, a more complete "picture" emerges. Each one only receives in part.

If the case you're referring to was actually a taking over by another person to interpret - you know, the gifts operate in human beings so our "flesh" gets in the way sometimes. I've read where two people with gifts argued in front of a congregation about which one of them was better than the other one - can't remember which gift but you get the point.

In relationship to the content - it's going to be about the same as a prophecy. The content is to profit all. Since the message is from the Lord is turns out attention towards Him.

By the way, churches are probably going to see a lot "team" type things because in the past with one person who was the xyz person, if that person failed, that aspect of the ministry suffered. Now the Lord seems to be using more believers.

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

Again, I appreciate the answer, but I feel like the main question has been avoided.

So, to make it as simple as possible:

What Biblical evidence is there that says that a Word in Tongues is directed to the Church from God in the manner that we often say it is? Likewise, what is the Bible evidence against this?

TexasKitKat · Jun 20, 2007

In answer to your question:

1Co 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

This seems to imply the tongue is when they are together. Why would God need an interpreter? He knows all things.

Also, regarding 1Co 14:2a referenced by the commentator, see the latter part of 1Co 14:5 which says:

"for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying."

To me this implies that the tongue and interpretation are to the church not to God.

As to the other question, I think the "interpretation" is something that is given and received "by faith". When an interpretation rises up within a person, believing it is from God, he speaks it forth. Because it goes through a human first, it is subject to error. "Now we see in a glass darkly." Possibly in your situation both speakers perceived a rising up of an interpretation and spoke it forth. One may have been continuing the other's or simply may have made a mistake. To protect his flock, I think it's important that the pastor have discernment and can perceive if such is true. But even that discerning must be of faith.

My understanding is that it has long been held by much of the church that tongues during private prayer is to God, and tongues "spoken forth" in church are for edifying the church. The confusion in the study of the 1 Corinthians passage seems to come because we mix up which incidence of tongues the writer is referring to.

I personally get uncomfortable in situations where the pastor, worship leader, etc. push the people to pray in tongues together to God during the service. I'm not at all convinced this is in accord with scripture. But then, I'm also not certain every conceivable situation is covered in scripture. I think Paul spoke to specific issues in the 1 Co. passage.

I'm no theologian so these are just my opinions. Hope this helps.

edited to add: If I had been the 2nd interpreter and realized I would be interrupting someone to give the int. I would have waited until they were finished or just not given it. I don't think God wants us to be rude to each other....but then, there was Smith Wigglesworth so what do I know?

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

Thanks for your response, KitKat. But, if you wouldn't mind, I'd like to take it a bit deeper.

"My understanding is that it has long been held by much of the church that tongues during private prayer is to God, and tongues "spoken forth" in church are for edifying the church."

We must be careful, however. If we simply go by what has been held by the Church, we would be like the Jewish people, still awaiting our messiah. Jesus spoke harshly against tradition, and we must be careful to not be caught up in tradition.

I have no doubt that "tongues spoken forth" - as you call it - are for the edification - the building - of the Church. Paul makes that clear.

But, I pose a hypothetical situation here. What if someone in your church were just to begin praising and worshiping God in the same fashion one would go about to speak in tongues. Being that, when it's silent, the person stood up, and loudly began to praise and worship God.

Would you consider that edifying the church?

tturt · Jun 20, 2007

Previous post:
1Co 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

1Co 12:11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit,

Last post: 1Co 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

Dave01 · Jun 20, 2007

Zipster said:
I'm, however, beginning to have a few doubts about what I'm seeing in the church - in some regards. I have heard what have been called interpretations - but, as it is, with such a thing you can only accept it by faith (lest there be multiple of the same words being spoken, and other signs that follow it, in my opinion). But, to blindly accept what some call an interpretation can be quite dangerous.

That is why there should be people in your church that operate in the discerning of spirits gift. I operate in that gift myself, and I'm constantly measuring what is of The Holy Spirit and what is not throughout the service.

The gift operations are to be stricktly by The Holy Spirit so that the body receives edification in the process. As soon as a person steps into their human spirit instead of it being completely by The Holy Spirit, it is like night and day, and I and a few others will speak up immediately and shut that person down.

I can remember a time not too long ago that a word in tongues was given. A few moments later, someone began to speak the "interpretation" - only to be interrupted by another person who gave the "interpretation" - even though they said two different things.

I understand that our flesh tries to sneak in here and there, and we can often attribute our own hopes and desires as the voice of God. So, while it bothered me a bit, I didn't dwell too much on it. However, last night, I was reading a Bible commentary, and decided to read what it said concerning 1st Corinthians 14. I was a bit surprised, and thus, my question arises.

The following is from the commentary: "Perhaps you've been in church services where someone stands up and gives an utterance in tongues, followed by what is supposed to be an interpretation--a word to the congregation. I do not believe such an occurrence is proper understanding of tongues and interpretation. Paul says that a true interpretation of tongues will not be addressed to men, but to God (1cor. 14:2a). A true interpretation of tongues gives praise and adoration to the Father--not a message to the congregation. Go through the Book of Acts, and you will see that prophecy consists of words spoken to the congregation, while tongues and interpretation consists of praise to God."

Negative ghostrider.

Tongues in the assembly is prophetic, and they come under the guidelines of prophecy, which is "edification, exhoration, and comfort." Those three things are what you measure a message of The Holy Spirit by, besides the edification you should receive inside your spirit when the tongue is given and the interpretation is given. Two separate edifications should be witnessed inside of you.

That commentary you quoted is typical of a person who has no experience in the gifts. He/she is only posting their own thoughts on the subject, and it is easy to tell they are wrong when they didn't know the tongue by The Holy Spirit in the assembly was prophetic.

So, my question is: have we actually been giving the correct interpretation when words of tongues have been given?

First off,..the person that gave the tongue should have the interpretation inside of them also. It should be revealed to them what the message is in their spirit so that they can give the interpretation if no one has the message in the assembly. They need to wait to see if The Holy Spirit gives the message to another, but have the message inside just in case no one has it. Anyone operating in the ministry of tongues for an assembly needs to be able to interpret also.

And, what Biblical evidence is there for this?

5 (ASV) Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

That is why tongues in the assembly is equal to prophecy.

What Biblical evidence is there against what was stated in the commentary. Thanks and God bless.

I'll quote the same quote that KitKat posted,..

26 ¶ (ASV) What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

Break out your concordance and look that word "when" up in the greek, you will find that it says "when ye may" or "whenever ye may." This section of scripture statement is a command, and the very reason that cessionalists(sp) are absolutely wrong. So when you read commentaries from these folks, just understand that they are speaking from a non-experience viewpoint. They are on the sidelines attempting to comment on what they think they see going on, not what is actually happening by The Holy Spirit.

Any church can have their moment of flesh. Be careful that you recognize it as such, and not start condemning GOD and HIS word wrongly. Your pastor is to ensure that people understand the proper usage of the gifts and not allow misuse to start happening. If you see the flesh uprising and the leadership not doing anything about it, bring it up to the pastor after the service, or at a time when it is more convenient, but bring it up nontheless.

The gifts are in operation and will continue to be in operation until "that which is perfect is come." The bride is neither in a perfect state yet, nor has Jesus come for us. Once we get up in heaven, we will not need tongues, healing, and such, we will be near to The Father for everything. So at this point, The Holy Spirit is to be allowed to operate His gifts.

I hope some of this helps. I can be sort of forceful in my speaking, so try to overlook that and take what you can out of it.

later on.

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

Thanks for your response, Dave. But, likewise, I still have questions.

First, it should be said that the author of the Commentary believes in tongues, and speaks in tongues. He makes the challenge to go through the book of Acts, and look at what is said with people speaking in tongues. He claims that Tongues are used solely to praise God in the book of Acts - not to give a prophetic word.

Even so, I feel as if the main question of this has been missed, or simply not answered. You used the following two scriptures - now, allow me to use them, as well.

"Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying."

"What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying."

So, according to the latter of those scriptures, a Psalm - song of praise - to God is able to edify the Church. Therefore, if speaking in tongues is praising God - as the commentary says - then would not the interpretation of this also be edifying the church?

I should even point out that when the Disciples first recieved the Holy Spirit, they were in quite a crowd of people. Yet, they didn't have a prophetic word. Not a single one of them had prophetic words. Rather, the Bible says:

Acts 2: 5-12 (NIV)
Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism Cretans and Arabswe hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"

They were declaring the wonders of God. Many of the Psalms declare the wonders of God. And, the Bible says that Psalms edify the church. Doesn't that then mean that "words spoken forth" in tongues could be psalms of praise in different languages, and not prophetic?

Dave01 · Jun 20, 2007

Bring every thought into the obediance of Christ. Cast these imaginations down in the name of Jesus.

Pay attention to scripture here,...

5 (ASV) Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

Tongues in the assembly is equal to prophecy!

Whether that person in the commentary speaks in tongues or not, they are promoting a lie from satan when they say it is praise unto GOD only and not to be used in the assembly.

Their idea is against scripture. They are wrong, period. Case-closed.

There is no arguement or consideration. Over and out.

Brucea · Jun 20, 2007

Dave01 is right! The tongues given at the baptism of the Holy Spirit are a praise and prayer to God. For the sign gift of tongues which need interpreting are for the edification of the church. It is the difference between the initial evidence of speaking in tongues and the gifts of the spirit tongue. One is for our private prayer language one is a gift for the encouragement of the body.

tturt · Jun 20, 2007

Well, not everyone interprets those scriptures in the same manner. Everyone's entitled to their opinions.

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

I have payed attention to the scripture, and I have read it many times. It still seems to me that you fail to understand what I am saying.

Never once did I say - or even hint at - the idea that speaking in tongues during the assembly of believers should not be done, nor does the author of the commentary.

To even suggest that would be foolish, when Paul clearly makes it known that speaking in tongues has a place in the church service.

Perhaps I shall try again:

Using Biblical evidence, show me where it says the interpretation of tongues is a Prophecy. I see Biblical evidence saying that speaking in tongues is "declaring the wonders of God." I don't see evidence suggesting it is a message from God to the church.

Songs of praise, and psalms can edify the church. Therefore, IF the Tongues that is spoken forth in the Church Assembly is truly praises to God, then the correct interpretation would likewise edify the church.

Let me dig into this verse you keep saying a bit.

Here, Paul is saying, in very basic terms:

"Hey, I want you all to speak in tongues. But, it would be better if you prophesied. The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues. Unless he that speaks in tongues interprets what was said so that the rest of the Church can be edified."

No matter how many times I read this, I don't see it saying, "Because prophesy edifies the Church, and the interpretation of tongues edifies the church, the interpretation must be a prophecy."

The Bible states that speaking in tongues edify ourselves. Are we sitting there prophesying over ourself? Most people would say "no - that's your personal prayer language, which differs from the tongues 'spoken forth' during the assembly." - WHERE IS THE BIBLICAL PROOF THAT THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF TONGUES?

" Their idea is against scripture." - you say. Then show me - with scripture - how it is. So far, you've shown me the same scripture which doesn't say anything definitive on the subject matter aside from the fact that the interpretation of tongues edifies the church. - of which, according to scripture, Psalms also do.

Dave01 · Jun 20, 2007

Let's take a look at scripture,..

28 (ASV) And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues.

Tongues is a ministry established in the body of Christ. The word "tongues" here is plural in the greek. There are actually 4 types of tongues according to scripture,..

Prayer language,..

2 (ASV) 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.

Tongues known by the hearers and unknown to the speaker,..

6 (ASV) And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his own language.

Tongues for the edification of The Church (prophetic tongue),..

10 (ASV) There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and no kind is without signification.

11 (ASV) If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me.

12 (ASV) So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church.

13 (ASV) Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.

Singing in tongues,...

15 ¶ (ASV) 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.

The reason I kept posting 1 Cor 14:5 here is because the gift of prophecy is listed as being greater than tongues, but only if no one interprets. If a tongues message is interpreted, then the gift of prophecy is not greater than that tongue. That passage is absolutely clear about this.

The gifts are for the body of Christ and for the edification of the assembly. Where else is one to be prophesing and edifying the body except at church?

Zipster · Jun 20, 2007

I don't want to sound rude, as I certainly appreciate the time you're taking to respond.

However, do you simply not understand what I'm asking, or something? Because, none of those scriptures say anything definitive, and the evidence is shaky at best.

"divers kinds of tongues." - Could be seen to mean different languages.

"(ASV) 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." - This is what I have been saying the entire time. Speaking in tongues - according to this passage - is Speaking to God, and not the church.

What then? If it is interpreted, is it still directed to God? I'd think so.

"And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his own language." - This simply says that the languages that the disciples were speaking were also the languages of man. Paul says in 1 Corinth 13, "Though I speak with the tongues (languages) of angels and man." It just so happened that the disciples were speaking the language of men - and, for the Glory of God - were speaking the languages of those around them.

"12 (ASV) So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church.

13 (ASV) Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret."

You stressed gifts? Of course there are a multitude of different types of spiritual gifts. If speaking in tongues were the only one, you'd have a point. Every spiritual gift is meant to edify the church - be it tongues, prophecy, revelation, healing or whatever.

You have yet to remark about my various comments about Psalms also edifying the church.

Even so, those verses don't provide evidence that the interpretation is prophetic. It only says that the interpretation will Edify - which, I now stress: Psalms of praise will edify the Church. If the interpretation is a declaration of God's amazing wonders, would that not strengthen the church it was said in?

"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." - I fail to see any form of point there. Singing is a conscious decision made by the person. Not a different type of language.

If an accurate interpretation was given for someone who had be signing in tongues, I'm willing to bet that it would be - you guessed it: Songs of praise to God, which would edify the church.

"The reason I kept posting 1 Cor 14:5 here is because the gift of prophecy is listed as being greater than tongues, but only if no one interprets. If a tongues message is interpreted, then the gift of prophecy is not greater than that tongue. That passage is absolutely clear about this."

I agree with you there. That's quite evident. Even so, the passage does not say that the interpretation of the tongue is a prophecy - merely that it is not less valuable than prophecy.

Here's a question: If the interpretation of tongues is Prophetic, yet we can prophesy without tongues, then what is the point of going through the tongues-part? It's almost like saying you have to be in church to pray - that you can't go to God from where you are.

If God is speaking prophetically to someone, why would he speak in a way we can't understand naturally, when he's fully able - and very willing - to speak it to us clearly?

Again, I say, you have only given very shaky evidence to saying there is multiple forms of tongues. And, you have given far less evidence concerning a word in tongues to be Prophetic.

Dave01 · Jun 20, 2007

Zipster said:
I don't want to sound rude, as I certainly appreciate the time you're taking to respond.

However, do you simply not understand what I'm asking, or something? Because, none of those scriptures say anything definitive, and the evidence is shaky at best.

"divers kinds of tongues." - Could be seen to mean different languages.

Tongues are different languages,..

¶ (ASV) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.

What is the language of angels here promoted by Paul? There is nothing that Paul attributes it to other than the gift of tongues.

- This is what I have been saying the entire time. Speaking in tongues - according to this passage - is Speaking to God, and not the church.

And that is a satanic lie from that commentator you're agreeing with. Our prayer language is between GOD and us, but the prophetic tongue used in services is GOD talking to the assembly. How else is the assembly to be edified if it is not The Holy Spirit doing the edifying to the body of Christ there?

It would be impossible.

"And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his own language." - This simply says that the languages that the disciples were speaking were also the languages of man. Paul says in 1 Corinth 13, "Though I speak with the tongues (languages) of angels and man." It just so happened that the disciples were speaking the language of men - and, for the Glory of God - were speaking the languages of those around them.

You're missing a part here,..

4 (ASV) And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The languages were not being spoken by direction of the believers, but by the direction or utterance, of The Holy Spirit according to scripture, hence it is one of the identified usages of the gift of tongues by The Holy Spirit.

You stressed gifts? Of course there are a multitude of different types of spiritual gifts. If speaking in tongues were the only one, you'd have a point. Every spiritual gift is meant to edify the church - be it tongues, prophecy, revelation, healing or whatever.

You have yet to remark about my various comments about Psalms also edifying the church.

What is there to comment about?

We should be receiving an edification during teaching/preaching, we should receive an edification during the revelation gifts, such as prophecy, etc, we should receive an edification during tongues and interpretation, and we should also receive an edification during song and worship. We should receive various edifications throughout the entire service.

Even so, those verses don't provide evidence that the interpretation is prophetic. It only says that the interpretation will Edify - which, I now stress: Psalms of praise will edify the Church. If the interpretation is a declaration of God's amazing wonders, would that not strengthen the church it was said in?

You're attempting to dismiss tongues in a service somehow, when scripture is clear that tongues is a ministry established in the body of Christ.

Scripture gives interpreted tongues equal footing as prophecy, that has already been shown. Prophecy is measured by only one way in the NT,..

3 (ASV) But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, and {1} exhortation, and consolation. {1) Or comfort}

An interpreted tongue is equal to prophecy, it is not greater or less, and it is to be measured by the same rules regarding prophecy.

- I fail to see any form of point there. Singing is a conscious decision made by the person. Not a different type of language.

Then you have not witnessed singing by utterance of The Holy Spirit.

If an accurate interpretation was given for someone who had be signing in tongues, I'm willing to bet that it would be - you guessed it: Songs of praise to God, which would edify the church.

If it is interpreted, it falls under prophecy. Scripture is clear about it no matter what you may wish it to say different.

I agree with you there. That's quite evident. Even so, the passage does not say that the interpretation of the tongue is a prophecy - merely that it is not less valuable than prophecy.

Here's a question: If the interpretation of tongues is Prophetic, yet we can prophesy without tongues, then what is the point of going through the tongues-part? It's almost like saying you have to be in church to pray - that you can't go to God from where you are.

If God is speaking prophetically to someone, why would he speak in a way we can't understand naturally, when he's fully able - and very willing - to speak it to us clearly?

Again, I say, you have only given very shaky evidence to saying there is multiple forms of tongues. And, you have given far less evidence concerning a word in tongues to be Prophetic.

Scripture is quite clear on it, it is just you not looking beyond your bias here. You're just repeating the same types of questions that cessionalists post at times, when scripture is clear on it,..

27 (ASV) If any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two, or at the most three, and that in turn; and let one interpret:

28 (ASV) but if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

These are commands, not suggestions,..

39 (ASV) Wherefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

Dave01 · Jun 20, 2007

I've seen people baptized in the Spirit, and likewise, have been baptized in the spirit. I say all this to simply say that I know that God continues to work mightily, and that my church strives after God passionately.

Really? Do you speak with tongues?

Zipster · Jun 21, 2007

Yes, I speak in tongues regularly in my prayer life.

I'm asking the same questions which have yet to receive sufficient answer. You say I'm trying to "dismiss" tongues - yet, every service, I hope there is one given. You say I'm believing a Satanic lie, when a spirit-filled believe has brought all of this into question. You say there are different types of tongues, yet provide no evidence for it.

As it is, I believed that tongues were prophetic. But, the word of God does tell us to examine and test such things - which is what I'm doing. And, as I'm doing it, I'm not seeing evidence supporting what I originally believed.

I'm seeing someone try to justify their bias with shaky scripture. I have heard people sing in tongues, and likewise, I have sung in tongues as well. What is different about it that makes it its own type of language? It's my normal prayer-language in the form of song. Just like if I were to normally sing, it would be my own language put in the form of song.

" "divers kinds of tongues." - Could be seen to mean different

languages. Tongues are different languages,.."

Yes, and when the Holy Spirit baptized the disciples, they began to speak in divers languages, which were understood by those around them. But, you're saying that this language of understanding the prayer-language of someone else is it's own language.

"What is the language of angels here promoted by Paul? There is nothing that Paul attributes it to other than the gift of tongues."

I've never called that into question, as that's pretty clear. What I see Paul saying is that some prayer language is the language of men - languages that men speak somewhere in the world. And, some people's prayer language is the language spoken by angels in Heaven. Is there a difference in their nature? I don't see it. Each one is the gift of tongues, and each one is just a different spoken language of creation.

"And that is a satanic lie from that commentator you're agreeing with. Our prayer language is between GOD and us, but the prophetic tongue used in services is GOD talking to the assembly. How else is the assembly to be edified if it is not The Holy Spirit doing the edifying to the body of Christ there?

It would be impossible."

So, are you saying that the scripture is a Satanic lie? Because, I was agreeing with scripture.

"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."

That scripture is what I was agreeing with. That those who speak in tongues are Speaking "not unto men, but unto God."

Please. Show me definitive proof of "the prophetic tongue." What is definitive proof? Show me a time in the Bible where we see the interpretation/translation of tongues. Show me where the Bible says that The Holy Spirit, through tongues, speaks to the church.

Of course it is ultimately the Holy Spirit that does the edifying of the church - No matter what gift might be used. You make it sound like the ONLY way the church can be edified is through Prophecy, when that is simply not true.

"You're attempting to dismiss tongues in a service somehow, when scripture is clear that tongues is a ministry established in the body of Christ." - Supporting scripture?

Yes. The Bible says that the interpretation of tongues will edify the church. And the Bible says Prophecy will edify the church. This doesn't mean the interpretation is prophecy - only that each will edify.
"An interpreted tongue is equal to prophecy, it is not greater or less, and it is to be measured by the same rules regarding prophecy."

Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
An interpreted tongue is no better, and no worse than prophecy. That's what Paul is saying in the scripture - he's not saying they are the same thing.

When I pray in tongues, it's between God and I. The Holy Spirit is giving me utterance as I pray to him in an unknown language. God desires to be worshiped "in spirit and in truth"- He knows my needs before I say them. I don't even have to make mention of my needs, but I do anyway for the sake of communication.

The only way I know how one could worship "in spirit" would be my doing it in tongues. But, if it is the Spirit that gives us the words, we have no control over what we are actually saying to God. "The spirit speaketh mysteries."

When I pray in tongues, It's edifying myself - even though I don't understand what I'm saying, I'm edifying myself. If I worship God in English - with my understanding - I am also edifying myself.

If I speak tongues before the congregation, I'm not edifying the congregation because they don't know what I'm saying, and as far as they know, I could be saying jibberish. If an interpretation is given, they are edified.

Now, what if the interpretation was: "Lord God, you are Worthy of all praise, and all exultation. No one else holds power to command the sun when to rise and when to fall; To no other will every tongue confess, and to no other shall the praise be given. For, you alone are worthy."

If that was the interpretation - which is declaring the wonders of God - you're saying that wouldn't edify the church? You're saying that to hear what The Spirit is speaking to the Father wouldn't edify the church?

You're also saying that such a message would never be the interpretation because it's not a prophecy. Or, are you saying that is a prophecy?

" These are commands, not suggestions,.." - I never said they were suggestions.

" You're just repeating the same types of questions that cessionalists post at times, when scripture is clear on it,.."

If scripture was clear on it, there wouldn't be such confusion on my behalf. And, if it were clear on it, then certainly you would have been able to persuade me by now.

Dave01 · Jun 21, 2007

Zipster said:
I'm asking the same questions which have yet to receive sufficient answer. You say I'm trying to "dismiss" tongues - yet, every service, I hope there is one given. You say I'm believing a Satanic lie, when a spirit-filled believe has brought all of this into question. You say there are different types of tongues, yet provide no evidence for it.

It is just you dismissing the evidence provided. You can go back over my posts on this and read up on it, I'm not going to reinterate what you should already understand by now.

My position is fully supported by scripture and the doctrine of my church, yours, on the other hand, teeters on heresy from contrived individuals who have itchy ears; who refused to adhere to the established orthodox usage of the gifts described in our bibles, and decided to venture outside of the box, persay, only to make a fool of themselves in the process.

You're more than welcome to do as they have done, but don't be upset when people continually disagree with your ideas. There is nothing hidden here that is waiting to be discovered that wasn't shown to the saints of old and put into use.

As it is, I believed that tongues were prophetic. But, the word of God does tell us to examine and test such things - which is what I'm doing. And, as I'm doing it, I'm not seeing evidence supporting what I originally believed.

You're talking about examining and testing things, how is one to test a tongue given in an assembly? What guidelines are you to use in scripture?

There is no guideline to establish if it was of The Holy Spirit unless you measure the interpretation against the prophecy guideline of Edification, Exhoration, Comfort.

That is the scripture way of measuring it, and knowing ahead of time of what to expect in the overall message given in the interpretation.

I'm seeing someone try to justify their bias with shaky scripture. I have heard people sing in tongues, and likewise, I have sung in tongues as well. What is different about it that makes it its own type of language? It's my normal prayer-language in the form of song. Just like if I were to normally sing, it would be my own language put in the form of song.

Not in a service friend. Placing a tune behind your prayer language is not the utterance of The Holy Spirit, that is you stepping out with your gift on your own, not an utterance prompted and given by The Holy Spirit in a service to be interpreted.

Like I said, you have not seen singing in tongues.

Yes, and when the Holy Spirit baptized the disciples, they began to speak in divers languages, which were understood by those around them. But, you're saying that this language of understanding the prayer-language of someone else is it's own language.

You're mixing things up.

I can step out with my gift at any time, night or day, so can a lot of Spirit-filled believers, but that is me and them stepping out "by our spirit" not The Holy Spirit providing the utterance through us. Acts 2 is clear, the disciples were speaking by the utterance of The Holy Spirit, so this was another diverse operation of this particular gift.

I've never called that into question, as that's pretty clear. What I see Paul saying is that some prayer language is the language of men - languages that men speak somewhere in the world. And, some people's prayer language is the language spoken by angels in Heaven. Is there a difference in their nature? I don't see it. Each one is the gift of tongues, and each one is just a different spoken language of creation.

It is completely different. What I speak by my mind originates from/through my mind, not my spirit. My prayer language is of my spirit, and it supercedes my mind, meaning it goes beyond my mind. The unregenerate cannot speak to GOD in this angelic language without it being by an evil spirit. This new language is given by Jesus unto those who are His elect, and only those, no one else.

So, are you saying that the scripture is a Satanic lie? Because, I was agreeing with scripture.

"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."

That scripture is what I was agreeing with. That those who speak in tongues are Speaking "not unto men, but unto God."

You're chopping up scripture to suit your needs here. Put the verses together,..

1 ¶ (ASV) Follow after love; yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

2 (ASV) 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.

3 (ASV) But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, and {1} exhortation, and consolation. {1) Or comfort}

An interpreted tongue is understood as prophecy since prophecy is no longer greater than it,..

5 (ASV) Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

Prophecy is by utterance of The Holy Spirit through an individual so as to provide edification to the assembly, so is tongues, and so is the interpretation of the tongue given in a service. These examples are only operated by The Holy Spirit in a service. At no time do we try to manipulate our gifts in a service without being prompted by The Holy Spirit because they will only provide edification to ourselves, not the assembly. Edification is only received from The Holy Spirit, not another persons spirit.

Please. Show me definitive proof of "the prophetic tongue." What is definitive proof? Show me a time in the Bible where we see the interpretation/translation of tongues. Show me where the Bible says that The Holy Spirit, through tongues, speaks to the church.

Here is your definitive proof,..

5 (ASV) Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

If that is not good enough for you, then you are demanding things on your own, not what The Holy Spirit is revealing to you. The word "Trinity" is not anywhere in our bibles either, but the teaching is clearly revealed in the OT and throughout the NT. Are you going to start denying the triune nature of GOD also since you cannot find that word in there?

It is your fault that you are unable to understand the scripture teachings, not some church, and certainly not me.

Of course it is ultimately the Holy Spirit that does the edifying of the church - No matter what gift might be used. You make it sound like the ONLY way the church can be edified is through Prophecy, when that is simply not true.

The gift of tongues is catagorized as a "Vocal" type gift in a service, just like Prophecy is. Do a search on the web and see what churches designate this gift as. There is no other designation for it in a service. It is not a power gift, or a revelation type gift.

A Pastor can step into prophecy when he preaches, thereby providing edification to the assembly since it was by The unction of The Holy Spirit and not from their notes they brought.

In a service, prophecy, in it's various forms, is very important.

"You're attempting to dismiss tongues in a service somehow, when scripture is clear that tongues is a ministry established in the body of Christ." - Supporting scripture?

28 (ASV) And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues.

These are offices/ministries listed in scripture, designated by GOD places within the body. Tongues is listed with these offices as a ministry. Quite clear.

An interpreted tongue is no better, and no worse than prophecy. That's what Paul is saying in the scripture - he's not saying they are the same thing.

Do you realize what you even wrote here???? If it is not better, and it is not worse,....then it must be the same as prophecy, or as I said, equal to it.

When I pray in tongues, it's between God and I. The Holy Spirit is giving me utterance as I pray to him in an unknown language. God desires to be worshiped "in spirit and in truth"- He knows my needs before I say them. I don't even have to make mention of my needs, but I do anyway for the sake of communication.

The only way I know how one could worship "in spirit" would be my doing it in tongues. But, if it is the Spirit that gives us the words, we have no control over what we are actually saying to God. "The spirit speaketh mysteries."

When I pray in tongues, It's edifying myself - even though I don't understand what I'm saying, I'm edifying myself. If I worship God in English - with my understanding - I am also edifying myself.

If I speak tongues before the congregation, I'm not edifying the congregation because they don't know what I'm saying, and as far as they know, I could be saying jibberish. If an interpretation is given, they are edified.

And that is where you are wrong. I consistently receive an edification on each tongue given in our church, each prophecy given, and also each interpretation given. That is the gift of discerning of spirits in operation through me.

If there is no edification from your tongues messsage, then it was not The Holy Spirit speaking through you, but you speaking by your spirit, you acting on your own prompting, not The Holy Spirits prompting.

Now, what if the interpretation was: "Lord God, you are Worthy of all praise, and all exultation. No one else holds power to command the sun when to rise and when to fall; To no other will every tongue confess, and to no other shall the praise be given. For, you alone are worthy."

If that was the interpretation - which is declaring the wonders of God - you're saying that wouldn't edify the church? You're saying that to hear what The Spirit is speaking to the Father wouldn't edify the church?

You're also saying that such a message would never be the interpretation because it's not a prophecy. Or, are you saying that is a prophecy?

There is no other listed guideline except the one to measure prophecy. If the message does not "Edify and Exhort and Comfort" then it was not by inspiration of The Holy Spirit. There is no "Or" in between any of those words, the message must equal all three to be correct.

This is not legalism, this is Spiritual gift operations 101 basic, which you obviously are not paying attention to in your bible or you are being taught incorrectly by members within your church.

Again,...there is no other listed guideline in scripture to measure a vocal gift, of which tongues is, expect by prophecy, which correctly aligns with scripture of what vocal gifts are, and what people should be using on a consistent basis to measure them in a service.

" These are commands, not suggestions,.." - I never said

they were suggestions. " You're just repeating the same types of questions that cessionalists post at times, when scripture is clear on it,.."

If scripture was clear on it, there wouldn't be such confusion on my behalf. And, if it were clear on it, then certainly you would have been able to persuade me by now.

Not when you brought a preconceived idea here. You're more than able to follow through with it since no one is able to change your mind on it, in fact, go for it fella, it's not like I'm going to loose any sleep if you make yourself out to be wrong and spend your Spiritual life debating with people instead of reaching for more. That seems to be the Christian fad amongst the young folks as yourself. Just debate, debate, debate, until you hearts content. I got better things to do than just that.

Yet, another Tongues/Interpretation question

Member

Junior Member

Member

Senior Veteran

Member

Member

Member

Senior Veteran

Dave01

Guest

Member

Dave01

Guest

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Member

Dave01

Guest

Member

Dave01

Guest

Dave01

Guest

Member

Dave01

Guest

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency