Yet, another Tongues/Interpretation question

[gratefulgrace]

I hope this hasn't been already covered in the posts as I have not read them all word for word. However I think that the problem with tongues and interpretation is that the gift is actually a two fold gift meant to be exercised in faith by one person. In the church service the gift should be tongues and interpretation by the same individual. Although I do speak in tongues in my worship to God and in prayer I have never had the Spirit give the gift of tongues and interpretation to share with the Body. I think just spouting off a tongue and stopping there shows a lack of faith to manifest the gift properly.

1Cr 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.
...and also
1Cr 14:12 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church.
1Cr 14:13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.
Further, The problem of the one worshipper interupting the other's interpretation I believe is one of a lack of Spiritual Maturity. The Holy Spirit does not compel us to speak so there should be plenty of time to allow the other one to speak and finish their message first. I think it was a case of overzealousness and perhaps not totally Spirit Sanctioned. (At least timing wise) It could also have been an intepretation and then a prophesy one after the other.
Hope this helps answer your initial question. Jan

 

[gratefulgrace]

Oh and by the way I do believe that The Gift of Tongues and Interpretation is different from the gift of prophesy. Otherwise they would both be called prophesy and why would God choose to use a two step process when a one step works even better. I think Tongues and interpretation is a very powerful gift when it operates as it should in an assembly. As scripture says it is more of a sign to unbelievers than believers and was definitely used to get the attention of the multitude on the Day of Pentecost.

 

[Dave01]

I hope this hasn't been already covered in the posts as I have not read them all word for word. However I think that the problem with tongues and interpretation is that the gift is actually a two fold gift meant to be exercised in faith by one person. In the church service the gift should be tongues and interpretation by the same individual. Although I do speak in tongues in my worship to God and in prayer I have never had the Spirit give the gift of tongues and interpretation to share with the Body. I think just spouting off a tongue and stopping there shows a lack of faith to manifest the gift properly.

That is incorrect according to scripture,..

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:


30 (ASV) But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence.

What you think about this makes no difference to anyone, it is what GOD says in HIS word about it, that's what we hold as a standard.

It is not a lack of faith to hold your silence and let another interpret, but one of obediance when a person is operating in this ministry.

 

[Zipster]

"Oh and by the way I do believe that The Gift of Tongues and Interpretation is different from the gift of prophesy. Otherwise they would both be called prophesy and why would God choose to use a two step process when a one step works even better. I think Tongues and interpretation is a very powerful gift when it operates as it should in an assembly. As scripture says it is more of a sign to unbelievers than believers and was definitely used to get the attention of the multitude on the Day of Pentecost."

Thank you, Gratefulgrace, for your response.

Dave, how can you say it's incorrect according to scripture?

Let us look at one of the scriptures you've said over and over:

"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified."

The one who prophecies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues UNLESS the one who speaks in tongues interprets. How can the one who speaks in tongues interpret the tongue then if he's not supposed to?

There's a big keyword in the scripture you provided, and it's "IF." It doesn't say "When a revelation is made to another" it says, "IF a revelation is made to another."


Either way, Dave, you haven't proven anything to me yet, and I'm actually fairly sure it's over a slight misunderstanding that one of us is having. But, there's no point in continuing. I came here with a question that was brought up within my devotional time and thus, have been judged and basically condemned. Therefore, I'll keep it between God and myself, and let him answer in his timing, all while continuing to look through the scriptures.

May God bless you.

 

[Dave01]

Dave, how can you say it's incorrect according to scripture?

Because it is.

We can look at it closer in the greek,..

27 (GUV) If anyone {SUBJECT} is speaking with a tongue, {MEANS} let it be (by) two or the most three, and (in) succession, and let one {SUBJECT} keep interpreting.

The passage does not say "let each one interpret" it says "let one interpret." She added to scripture in this case by stating her personal opinion instead of ensuring her view was according to scripture.

Let us look at one of the scriptures you've said over and over:

"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified."

The one who prophecies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues UNLESS the one who speaks in tongues interprets. How can the one who speaks in tongues interpret the tongue then if he's not supposed to?

There's a big keyword in the scripture you provided, and it's "IF." It doesn't say "When a revelation is made to another" it says, "IF a revelation is made to another."

We are told that if we speak in tongues, that we are to pray that we interpret also. So what is your point here?

The passage still says that tongues and interpretation are equal to prophecy. That section of scripture does not say that the people operating in the ministry of tongues are suppose to be doing all of the interpreting in the assembly. What you are doing is overlooking the sections of scripture I posted that says a person is suppose to wait to see if another has a revelation on it.

I mean it is very obvious here,..

30 (ASV) But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence.

Kindof hard to say that the passage doesn't tell someone to be quiet who spoke first if he knows another has the revelation on what was spoken. It is passages like that you can't ignore, unless you are wanting to accept your idea over scripture.

Either way, Dave, you haven't proven anything to me yet, and I'm actually fairly sure it's over a slight misunderstanding that one of us is having. But, there's no point in continuing. I came here with a question that was brought up within my devotional time and thus, have been judged and basically condemned. Therefore, I'll keep it between God and myself, and let him answer in his timing, all while continuing to look through the scriptures.

May God bless you.

It would be better that you do take your opinions to GOD from now on instead of speaking too soon on a message board. I'm not going to be nice to someone who thinks it's ok to misinterpret scripture.

 

[gratefulgrace]

Dave said in referring to Jan's post "It is not a lack of faith to hold your silence and let another interpret, but one of obediance when a person is operating in this ministry."
That is not what I said at all. What I was saying is that it shows a lack of faith when we are unable to wait on God to keep the message He has us to share while another brother or sister shares what they have first been given. Your argument back to me was exactly my point. You also didn't read the scripture I quoted that contains Pauls admonition to pray to interpret if we speak in tongues in the congregation. I don't believe Paul is giving us a rule and of course more than one can speak as long as the body knows there will be consistent interpretaion. However ideally we should in faith be prepared to interpret what ever tongue messages the Lord chooses to give us. Please do not use Gods word to bash people over the head. This is not a war but a discussion I hope among friends and brothers/sisters in Christ. Peace Jan

 

[Dave01]

Dave said in referring to Jan's post "It is not a lack of faith to hold your silence and let another interpret, but one of obediance when a person is operating in this ministry."
That is not what I said at all. What I was saying is that it shows a lack of faith when we are unable to wait on God to keep the message He has us to share while another brother or sister shares what they have first been given. Your argument back to me was exactly my point. You also didn't read the scripture I quoted that contains Pauls admonition to pray to interpret if we speak in tongues in the congregation. I don't believe Paul is giving us a rule and of course more than one can speak as long as the body knows there will be consistent interpretaion. However ideally we should in faith be prepared to interpret what ever tongue messages the Lord chooses to give us. Please do not use Gods word to bash people over the head. This is not a war but a discussion I hope among friends and brothers/sisters in Christ. Peace Jan

Well, let's make sure we are understanding what you originally said here,..

In the church service the gift should be tongues and interpretation by the same individual.

That is untrue.

A person can give their own interpretation, and it has happened before in our assembly, but we are to adhere to scripture,..

27 (GUV) If anyone {SUBJECT} is speaking with a tongue, {MEANS} let it be (by) two or the most three, and (in) succession, and let one {SUBJECT} keep interpreting.

The greek doesn't say "let each one interpret" it says let one interpret.

However ideally we should in faith be prepared to interpret what ever tongue messages the Lord chooses to give us.

This is true. Anyone designated by The Lord to have a tongues ministry in an assembly should, by scripture, be able to interpret the message that GOD give to them, but they are not to do that unless GOD prompts them to interpret it. They are to wait on GOD and HIS leading before they jump into the interpretation.

The Holy Spirit's operation is like an orchestrated event. It does not rely on one person. Also it is orderly. Without it being structured orderly by scripture, you will have people barking and clucking eventually.

Please do not use Gods word to bash people over the head. This is not a war but a discussion I hope among friends and brothers/sisters in Christ. Peace Jan

I thank you to mind you own business about how I conduct myself before folks. If you don't like me, so be it, I'm not here to win a personality contest with you or anyone else, and neither was Jesus.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

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?

The only shred of evidence from the scriptures is Paul's quote of Isaiah . . . where God says HE will speak TO the people but they will not listen . . . and then Paul applies this quote to tongues and them, when interpreted as being for non-believers.

 

[gratefulgrace]

I have no reason to not like you, we are not here to argue but discuss. However, there is a fine line of attitude that can make it a learning experience or a power trip.
My concern about the rigid use of that scripture is that many people can often easily speak out in a tongue but then if there is no one to intepret it and they are not prepared to do so it can cause problems. (I have seen it happen). It is awkward. I have no difficulty with a 2 or at the most 3 (as Paul states) messages spoken and then intepreted but often the flow in the Spirit is better acheived if the tongue message is spoken and then interpreted in turn by whomever the Spirit designates whether yourself or another. Peace Jan

 

[rdclmn72]

The standard within scripture is that of the word and the spirit are one. The interpretation or prophecy or word of wisdom cannot contradict scripture, otherwise its only imagination and emotion.
There is no evil intention involved, people that start out with a gift should make an effort to understand the rules that apply to the excercise of their gift, its better than losing your credibility due to ignorance of the word.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

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.

When a person gives an interpretation to a tongues message, they give it in faith as they believe the Holy Spirit is giving it to them. It is not usually a direct translation. An interpretation given to the congregation could be a prophecy given in response to a prayer in tongues.

You are correct in believing that a true interpretation of a tongue is directed toward God. Paul teaches that when a person speaks in tongues, he is speaking to God; therefore it makes common sense that an interpretation would take the same form.

But sometimes, the Holy Spirit breaks through and prompts a person to pray out loud in tongues - stopping the progress of the meeting and alerting people that the Holy Spirit is about to break in and do something that is not programmed in the meeting. Then a person may be prompted with a prophecy and will give it, believing it to be the interpretation. Then another person may be activated in the Spirit to also give a prophecy. This can be why there can be more than one 'interpretation' to a tongue.

I am concerned though that the person interrupted the first person before he had a chance to finish. The second person should have been taken aside and corrected. It is bad manners, just like when a person is up giving a word, and someone breaks in and interrupts him before he is finished. Paul talked about this. He said let two or three speak - one at a time and let the other be silent. It is always good manners to allow a person to finish saying his piece before getting up and saying anything.

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.

You are correct in discerning that the flesh creeps in. We have our treasure in earthen vessels, and humans can make mistakes. It is up to the leadership though to correct people when they make errors like that.

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."

You are absolutely correct. That is exactly what Paul is teaching. You will also notice that in many Pentecostal churches people pray out loud in tongues without interpretations. Paul taught against that as well, but these people still do it. The problem is that the particular church has taught that it is okay to pray out loud in tongues without interpretations. It is an example where the formalism of a church has overruled the teaching of Scripture.

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.

I think that I have already answered that question. The practice of the church is not consistent with the teaching of Paul. But I think that it comes from a wrong undestanding of what interpretation is, and how a person praying out loud in tongues as to arrest the meeting is being used of the Spirit to allow Him to use others in prophecy. When used in that way the interpretations are actually prophecy. But a true interpretation of a tongue needs to be in a prayer, God directed format.

If you discussed these things with the Pastor, you will find that he will agree, and will be able to tell you that we are constantly learning more and more about how the Holy Spirit works among us.

I hope this helps.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think that the problem with tongues and interpretation is that the gift is actually a two fold gift meant to be exercised in faith by one person. In the church service the gift should be tongues and interpretation by the same individual.

You have made an interesting point here. I knew Smith Wigglesworth's (the great British healing evangelist who ministered in the first half of the 20th century) pianist when I was younger, and he said that Smith would speak in tongues while he was preaching and then give the interpretation. This will lift him up to a higher plane in the Spirit and cause his preaching to have more power.

I have the complete works of Smith Wigglesworth, and I see that often in the middle of his sermons there is a tongue and interpretation. So here is a good example of a person giving a tongues message and then the interpretation.