Speaking in Tongues (Privately, Outside of Church)

[peacefulbeliever]

Replying to a few comments from different posters:

@ peacefulbeliever

The only evidence I need is the evidence of the outpouring of the holy spirit on the day of Pentecost when the apostles were filled with the gift of holy spirit. There were many there who understood the apostles spoke in their language which they did not previously know being but Gentiles. There must have been some there who did not understand for they thought the apostles were drunk.

Yes, the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit; that’s what gave them the courage to go out and preach to the masses gathered there. These were, as we are told (or at least as was always taught to me), people who were in a building behind locked doors essentially in fear of their lives. Historically speaking, they lived in an occupied country and the occupiers (Romans) recently executed their leader/teacher, Jesus. A sort of “If the Romans could do that to him, perhaps we might be next”, train of thought. One may suspect they were discussing their next move; an “okay, what’s the plan now?” kind of deal.

The apostles were "behind closed doors for fear of the Jews" Jesus appeared to them and said - Receive ye holy spirit - the gift of holy spirit was NOT poured out at this time (John 20:22); there wouldn't have been enough room for all the people who had gathered for Pentecost. Nor did they manifest the gift of holy spirit while they were in the upper room - not enough room there either. Jesus told them: And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

The H/S gave them the courage to go out and preach to the people, declaring the works of God, spread the message and this new faith/belief, AND (most importantly) do it in the languages of those gathered there, rather than in the proper language to use in this situation (as defined by Jewish tradition, belief, and custom); Hebrew. Essentially, the crowd was expecting to hear Hebrew but instead, they got their native languages.

True enough - the gift of holy spirit gave them power to be witnesses - but witnesses of what? The outpouring of the gift of holy spirit . . . the promise of the Father . . . the baptism with holy spirit. And with great power the apostles were giving witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all. (Acts 4:33 NASB) giving them boldness now to preach Jesus Christ and him crucified! No doubt that the people gathered did not expect to hear the apostles speak in their "language" because the apostles did not know all those languages - they were not taught all those languages - that is why they were marveled and amazed. "How hear we every man in our own tongue (language)" . . .

What you need to understand is that there were only two languages spoken by said masses; Aramaic (the language of those already living in Judea, and the native language of the Jews of the Eastern Diaspora) and Greek (the native language of the Jews from the Western Diaspora and perhaps some of the larger cities in Judea as well). The apostles spoke both - no language miracle was needed. People were astonished and confounded because they expected to be hearing Hebrew, not Aramaic and Greek. Some even thought them drunk for daring to violate this religious precedent (i.e. not using the socially/religiously correct Hebrew).

Another understanding of the accusation of ‘drunk’ is that when those people heard what the apostles had to say, they thought what they were hearing was so far-fetched that the apostles must be drunk (i.e. the ravings of a bunch of drunks, so to speak).

Why were they confounded and amazed that these Galileans were speaking these native languages? They were hearing the wonders of God in their own tongues and that was "so far-fetched"? They even go so far as to say "What does this mean"? Then Peter explains - Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised holy spirit and has pour out what you now see and hear - what was poured out - the gift of holy spirit, i.e. they were baptized with holy spirit - power from on high and the "languages" witnessed to that fact.

Apparently you do not understand that these "tongues", this language comes from God . . . whether tongues of men or tongues of angels - that is what scripture says - that is what scripture means.

Yes, that’s what it says, but it must be looked at in context of the situation. “Tongues of angels” may be immediately dismissed as Paul was clearly using hyperbole.

Biblical tongues (all references) were simply real (foreign) languages. We still use the word ‘tongue’ today to refer to what is clearly real language (e.g. “What’s your mother tongue?”).

The inspiration to use glossolalia/tongues may come from God, but the ‘tongue’ itself is completely self-created coming the sounds that exist in one’s own native language.

"Yes, that is what it says" . . . BUT . . . no "but" - that is what God says and that is what God means.

Paul was clearly using hyperbole . . . Why is it that when figures of speech are used, people consider what is being said "less true" when figures of speech are used to place emphasis on what is being said? True, Jesus Christ is not a "door" but when used as descriptive language, we can visualize a door to the sheepfold whereby we must enter - the truth is just emphasized.

The "language" the apostles spoke was miraculously given to them from God - it is not self created. It is a language unknown to the speaker - never having been taught said language.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

If you go back and read through the discussion, you will see that I replied to a specific question. 1 Cor 14:22 discusses the use of the manifestation in the church.

Which goes to show there are no instructions for using tongues privately.

While the focus of 1 Cor 14 is the use of the manifestation of the Spirit in the church congregation, there are verses which relate to the use of the manifestation of tongues in prayer:

1 Corinthians 14:

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God

4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself

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.

16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit,

17 For thou verily givest thanks well


Vs 2 – speaking in tongues is speaking to God

Vs 4 – speaking in tongues edifies (builds up) the believer speaking

Vs 14 – speaking in tongues is the spirit of the born again one praying;

Vs 15 – praying with the spirit is speaking in tongues; singing with the spirit is singing in tongues.

Vs 16 – to speak in tongues is to "bless with the spirit"

Vs 17 – to speak in tongues is to "give thanks well"

I do not believe all who speak in tongues privately "all claim they got that tongue by receiving the Holy Spirit apart from salvation". That is something you have projected on to those you disagree with concerning the manifestation of kinds of tongues.

It is true that the statement needed clarification. I should have used the majority of tongue speakers here rather than all, but to clarify why I said all is because the brother "shrume" does disagree with tongue speakers that testify to receiving the Holy Spirit apart from salvation by which that tongue he uses privately has come that they have gained that kind of tongue by, but shrume says that he had received the ability to speak in tongues when he got saved and believes that all believers has been giving the ability to speak in tongues just as all believers have been given the ability to manifest any of the gifts of the Spirit at any given time by his or her will and stop by his or her will.

I believe when a person is born again, he/she receives the gift of holy spirit within. That gift of holy spirit is referred to in 1 Peter 1:23 as incorruptible seed. In Ephesians 1:13, it is referred to as being sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.

The gift of holy spirit is evidenced in the physical world we live in through the manifestation of the Spirit. The one and the selfsame Spirit energizes the gift of holy spirit within the born again one to bring forth the manifestation shown in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 (word of wisdom; word of knowledge; faith; gifts of healing; working of miracles; prophecy; discerning of spirits; kinds of tongues; interpretation of tongues).

All born again believers have within them the gift of holy spirit, which is the potential for bringing forth the manifestation. If/when the one and the selfsame Spirit works within (energizes) you, what is your response going to be? Yes? or No?

The fact that the majority of tongues speakers say how they had gotten their tongue for private use apart from salvation by what they believe was a receiving the Holy Spirit apart from salvation should concern you about the tongue you are using because God would never use His real gift of tongues which is for speaking unto the people, for private use.

Appears you need to take that up with God because He can (and does) use "His real gift of tongues" for the benefit of the individual believer.

How is my being edified (built up) not benefitting the church? Don't you want me strong and vibrant?

No one has a problem with a person eating good, nutritious food in order to maintain his/her physical body.

No one has a problem with a person who works out in order to strengthen his/her physical body.

No one has a problem with a believer who studies Scripture in order to remain mentally strong in the face of the world we live in.

But when it comes to a person being edified through speaking in tongues in his/her private prayer life, some people have a problem with that.

I just don't understand why some believers have a problem with that aspect of speaking in tongues.

1 Corinthians 12:7 testifies that the manifestations of the Spirit are to profit withal; the whole body of Christ; and not individually.

Again, God tells us that speaking in tongues edifies (builds up) the person speaking in tongues.

How is the whole body of Christ not profited by the building up of the individual believer?

I am thankful for my brothers and sisters in Christ who are strong when I am weak and I hope my brothers and sisters in Christ are thankful when I am strong if/when they are weak.

There is no way to change the precedent set for the use of tongues in the assembly or abroad in the missionary field.

The purpose of the manifestation of tongues with interpretation in the assembly is to edify those present.

The purpose of the manifestation of tongues with interpretation in the missionary field is to edify those present.

The Lord Jesus Christ gives the gift ministry of apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher to the body of believers to use in the local congregation as well as abroad in the missionary field.

You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the manifestation of the Spirit.

God's instruction to you is found in 1 Cor 14:38 if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant and 1 Cor 14:39 forbid not to speak with tongues.

Which is why if tongues do not come with interpretation, he is to be made silent in the assembly in 1 Corinthians 14:27-28

If there is no interpretation, the believer is to speak in tongues silently to God.

Please note that 1 Cor 14:28 does not say the believer is not to speak in tongues at all. 1 Cor 14:28 says the believer is to speak silently: But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

because a foreigner seeing 2 or 3 tongue speakers speak one by one while another interpret, may stand up and speak ignorantly out of turn. When no interpretation comes, that means the person spoke is a foreigner and is to be made to be silent because he knows what he is saying as God does, and he just doesn't know what was going on.

Complete fabrication of your own mind due to no comprehension of 1 Cor 14.

That is Paul way of saying that His tongues will come with interpretation, but tongue speakers wrest Paul's words around because they want to believe they can use tongues privately.

So there is a forbidding of tongues... when it does not come with interpretation. The Holy Spirit does nothing in half measures as the manifestations of the Spirit are to profit withal the assembly.

There is no forbidding of tongues when it does not come with interpretation.

There is clarification that if there is no interpretation the person is to speak silently to himself and to God:

1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

@ reneweddaybyday

In Acts 2:4, the apostles began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. The apostles spoke as the utterance was given to them by the Spirit.

See the first comment above. The H/S may have indeed inspired them as to what to say, but what they were saying was being said in Aramaic and Greek instead of the expected Hebrew.

They spoke more than Aramaic and Greek. The people were amazed because those who first spoke in tongues were Galilaeans (Acts 2:7). According to Acts 4:13, when Peter and John were brought before the high priest and the kindred of the high priest (Acts 4:6), Peter and John were considered unlearned and ignorant.

So on Day of Pentecost, all who were gathered there were confounded (Acts 2:6) and they were all amazed and marvelled (Acts 2:7) because they heard these unlearned and ignorant Galilaeans speak in our own tongue, wherein we were born (Acts 2:9).

Parthians, and medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (Acts 2:9).

Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes (Acts 2:10).

Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God (Acts 2:11).

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these [the manifestation enumerated in vss 8, 9, 10] worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit

The "one and the selfsame Spirit" is the One Who "worketh" (energizes) the manifestation. In the case of the utterance manifestation (kinds of tongues, interpretation of tongues, prophecy), the words are spoken by the believer. However, the words are revealed to the believer by the "one and the selfsame Spirit".

No, it’s the actual ability of speaking (foreign) languages and interpreting (translating) that is given by the Spirit; not the actual words/translations themselves.

The "actual ability of speaking" in tongues is the gift of holy spirit which is given to every believer at the time he/she is born again.

When the one and the selfsame Spirit energizes within the believer, the manifestation is the result. According to Acts 2:4, the Spirit gives the utterance.

Spiritual matters will never be understood by carnal means. When God says the Spirit gives the utterance (Acts 2:4), and that the manifestation is energized by the one and the selfsame Spirit (1 Cor 12:11), that is what He means. The manifestation of kinds of tongues does not have to fit your model in order to be the manifestation of kinds of tongues.

Except there isn’t anything spiritual about the production of glossolalia; just listen to several samples.

I will stick with Scripture when it comes to what I believe.

Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these worketh [Greek energei] that one and the selfsame Spirit

“Kinds of tongues” - again, the word used for ‘kinds’ here (‘genos’) carries the meaning of “related, belonging to the same family”, i.e. ‘families of languages’ (‘language families’: Semitic, Italic, Celtic, etc.) – a clear reference to real languages. Our word ‘genealogy’ has the same root.

1 Corinthians 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

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit


1 Cor 12:11 indicates that kinds of tongues is energized by that one and the selfsame Spirit. Therefore, the origin of the manifestation is the spiritual realm. It is then evidenced in the physical realm through the one speaking. The manifestation is spiritual in nature and evidenced in the physical.

As far as teaching and discussing Christianity, the gospel is spread through preaching: it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe(1 Cor 1:21).

Not sure what you mean here, but it seems the verse must be taken in context with the entire passage from verse 18 all the way to 31.

In your post #225, it appears to me you were implying that the manifestation of speaking in tongues is used when a teacher does not speak the common language of the group present at the time.

I wanted to clarify that the purpose of manifestation of tongues is not preaching or teaching. The Lord Jesus Christ gives the gift ministries for that purpose (Eph 4:11).

 

[Enow]

There is no forbidding of tongues when it does not come with interpretation.

There is clarification that if there is no interpretation the person is to speak silently to himself and to God:

1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

The reason I am skipping over your explanation because you are skipping over the precedent set by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:7 for how the manifestations of the Spirit were to come and for how it will profit which is the body of Christ in that assembly; not individually.

1 Corinthians 12:[SUP]7 [/SUP]But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.[SUP] 8 [/SUP]For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; [SUP]9 [/SUP]To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10To 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: 11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. 12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. [SUP]14 [/SUP]For the body is not one member, but many.....[SUP]18 [/SUP]But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. [SUP]19[/SUP]And if they were all one member, where were the body? 20But now are they many members, yet but one body. [SUP]21 [/SUP]And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.


That is how you can tell you are reading Paul's words wrong in 1 Corinthians 14th chapter, because he was not telling us how cool tongues is all by itself, but why prophesy is better then tongues because tongues is not a stand alone gift for any believer to be using privately. All those verses about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14th chapter is the same tongue that Paul says has to come with interpretation, otherwise it is unfruitful to the tongue speakers seeing how he does not understand it.

So we now address your quote above to point out that silence .. means silence. No sound. Nothing, because you try having that done today in the assembly, and you are bothering the people around you trying to hear, and today has a stereo sound system whereas back in those days, zilch. So, no.

You guys are reading Paul's words wrong. In context in light of how they are supposed to do tongues with interpretation...foreign visitors may speak up out of turn, not knowing what is going on.

1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]27 [/SUP]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.[SUP] 28 [/SUP]But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.[SUP] 29 [/SUP]Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.[SUP] 30 [/SUP]If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.[SUP] 31 [/SUP]For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

If you have per practice, 2 or 3 speak in tongues one by one and another interpret, then some foreign visitor, a newbie, may stand up and speak out of turn for WHY there is no interpretation coming.

The bold portion of the verse is the proof that tongues is not a stand alone gift, otherwise Paul would have taught that if there was no interpretation, then it was prayer time for the Holy Spirit, but not so. The italic underlined portion of verse 28 signifies why he is to be made silent in the assembly and that is he is a foreigner speaking out of turn and thus not manifested by the Holy Spirit.

ALL Bibles testify in John 16:13 that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself, but speaks what He hears and that means He cannot use tongues to utter His own intercessions back to God. Only the JV has Romans 8:26-27 right in keeping in truth with John 16:13 in that even His groanings cannot be uttered which is why ANOTHER is needed that knows the mind of the Spirit as He is the same One that searches our hearts as this is in according to the will of God of there being only One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

These are the elements of truth in scripture that proves tongue speakers are wresting Paul's words out of context of what Paul is saying to justify using tongues privately for all those benefits but yet cannot tell what that tongue did the last time they had used tongues privately and that is because His gift of tongues are given to profit the body withal & not individually as it shall come with interpretation to be fruitful to the tongue speaker once he understands the tongue that has been interpreted by another.

John 16:[SUP]13 [/SUP]Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Believers today think they have God's gift of tongues that comes with interpretation, but if they claim to be able to use it privately, then I have to doubt they ever had God's gift of tongues.

There has been a supernatural tongue in the world before Pentecost that is vain and profane babbling nonsense. They make up the interpretation too, but it is not really a language. That is the world's supernatural tongue whereas God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips to speak unto the people.

1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]20 [/SUP]Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.[SUP] 21 [/SUP]In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

Read about it at this link below before the moderator CS1 removes the link and perhaps this post as well, because he does not want christians to know about that vain & profane babbling supernatural tongue that is just nonsense that has been in the world before Pentecost came with the real God's gift of tongues. He has no defense against proving that tongue can be used privately when God wants us to be abstaining from all appearances of evil for why His tongues cannot be used privately at all.

Speaking in Tongues: Non-Christians speak in tongues, too

Another link to a thread I had just found out that the mod, CS1, had deleted recently.

Speaking In Tongues Not Necessarily Christian: Widespread In Heathen Religions

This is quoted from the second link.

IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.--Tongues occupied a significant place in ancient Greek religion. The seeress at Delphi, not far from Corinth, spoke in tongues. According to Plutarch (A.D. 44-117), interpreters were kept in attendance to explain her incoherent utterances. Many scholars have stated that tongues were experienced in the mystery religions (Osirius, Mithra, Eleusinian, Dionsyian, and Orphic cults). Some have concluded that the unintelligible lists of "words" in the "magical papyri" and in certain Gnostic "prayers" are records of ecstatic utterances. About A.D. 180 Celsus reported ecstatic utterances among the Gnostics. Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 120-198) described tongues speaking as it was practiced by the devotees of the Syrian goddess, Juno.

​

Today shamans (witch doctors, priests, or medicine men) in Haiti, Greenland, Micronesia, and countries of Africa, Australia, Asia, and North and South America speak in tongues. Several groups use drugs to aid in inducing the ecstatic state and utterances. Voodoo practitioners speak in tongues. Buddhist and Shinto priest have been heard speaking in tongues. Moslems have spoken in tongues, and an ancient tradition even reports that Mohammed himself spoke in tongues. According to his own account, after his ecstatic experiences he found it difficult to return to "logical and intelligible speech" (Kelsey, p. 143).​

I am showing legitimate concern for the body of Christ why His gift of tongues cannot be for private use. There are those who cannot handle the truth and are offended when they do not have an answer for my concern for tongue speakers today.

I believe in God's gift of tongues for speaking unto the people; I do not believe it is His tongue when those who claim they can use it privately too just because it does not come with interpretation. There is no way for us to determine if sinners have repented of their former practice and their supernatural tongue if God would switch the mode for what His tongues had been used for to be used privately.

God is not the author or confusion.

No believer needs tongues to get closer to God than they already are. They can pray normally to know what they had prayed for so they can give the Father genuine thanks in Jesus's name for answers to prayers. Praying in tongues robs the believer of giving known requests and denying the Father the chance to have His Son answer that request as well as receiving thanks for answers to prayers.

​

 

[notuptome]

How ironic all these tongues and no understanding even though the common tongue requires no interpretation.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[reneweddaybyday]

That is how you can tell you are reading Paul's words wrong in 1 Corinthians 14th chapter, because he was not telling us how cool tongues is all by itself, but why prophesy is better then tongues because tongues is not a stand alone gift for any believer to be using privately. All those verses about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14th chapter is the same tongue that Paul says has to come with interpretation, otherwise it is unfruitful to the tongue speakers seeing how he does not understand it.

If/when the church congregation is gathered in one place, Paul makes very plain that the manifestation of kinds of tongues is to be followed with the manifestation of interpretation of tongues.

You claim that speaking in tongues does not benefit the tongue speakers because he does not understand it. However, your claim that there is no benefit is in contradiction to what Scripture tells us about the manifestation of speaking in tongues.

I provided the verses which indicate speaking in tongues is speaking to God (1 Cor 14:2), speaking in tongues builds up the believer (1 Cor 14:4), speaking in tongues is the spirit of the born again one praying (1 Cor 14:14), to speak in tongues is to "bless with the spirit" (1 Cor 14:16), speaking in tongues "gives thanks well" (1 Cor 14:17).

Your denial does not negate what Scripture plainly states concerning the manifestation of tongues.

So we now address your quote above to point out that silence .. means silence. No sound. Nothing, because you try having that done today in the assembly, and you are bothering the people around you trying to hear, and today has a stereo sound system whereas back in those days, zilch. So, no.

Again, 1 Corinthians 14:28 does not say if there is no interpreter, the believer is not to speak in tongues.

1 Corinthians 14:28 clearly states that if there is no interpreter, the believer is to speak silently to God.

Again, your denial does not negate what Scripture plainly states.

1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]27 [/SUP]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.[SUP] 28 [/SUP]But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

. . .

The bold portion of the verse is the proof that tongues is not a stand alone gift, otherwise Paul would have taught that if there was no interpretation, then it was prayer time for the Holy Spirit, but not so. The italic underlined portion of verse 28 signifies why he is to be made silent in the assembly and that is he is a foreigner speaking out of turn and thus not manifested by the Holy Spirit.

In agreement that in the church congregation the manifestation of kinds of tongues is to be utilized in conjunction with the manifestation of interpretation of tongues.

However, there is no indication in the context that the person who is speaking in tongues to God is "a foreigner speaking out of turn and thus not manifested by the Holy Spirit".

I am showing legitimate concern for the body of Christ why His gift of tongues cannot be for private use. There are those who cannot handle the truth and are offended when they do not have an answer for my concern for tongue speakers today.

I did not click on your links and have no intention of doing so.

The first link indicating non-Christians speak in tongues, is completely erroneous as a person must be born again in order to have the manifestation of the Spirit in evidence in his/her life. So are you claiming that these "non-christians" are really born again believers?

Same question for your second link indicating those in heathen religions speak in tongues. Are you claiming that these heathen religion followers are born again? A person can speak in tongues only if he/she is born again.

So if these folks (the non-christians of the first link and the heathen religionists of the second link) are not born again, they are not speaking in tongues.

No believer needs tongues to get closer to God than they already are. They can pray normally to know what they had prayed for so they can give the Father genuine thanks in Jesus's name for answers to prayers. Praying in tongues robs the believer of giving known requests and denying the Father the chance to have His Son answer that request as well as receiving thanks for answers to prayers.

In agreement that "no believer needs tongues to get closer to God".

Not in agreement that praying in tongues "robs the believer".

 

[UnderGrace]

I was responding to this statement.

Apparently you do not understand that these "tongues", this language comes from God

All languages impart meaning to the hearer when they know the language, all languages on earth are for the purposes of communication between people who know the language

Yet, when people speak of tongues (glossa) and then redefine the meaning of the word glossa to mean private prayer utterances suddenly the need for intelligibility/meaning is not important because it is so, so, so spiritual and a mystery and the fact that it cannot be understood is acceptable even though the very word glossa means real earthly language

I don't believe I said the language didn't have to have meaning . . . did I?

 

[peacefulbeliever]

I was responding to this statement.
All languages impart meaning to the hearer when they know the language, all languages on earth are for the purposes of communication between people who know the language

Yet, when people speak of tongues (glossa) and then redefine the meaning of the word glossa to mean private prayer utterances suddenly the need for intelligibility/meaning is not important because it is so, so, so spiritual and a mystery and the fact that it cannot be understood is acceptable even though the very word glossa means real earthly language

Yes all languages have meaning. Scripture says that when one speaks with the Spirit, i.e. speaking in tongues, one is speaking to God. When one is in a group of believers, the tongue should be interpreted. Both are important. God does not want anyone ignorant of spiritual matters. Glossa does mean a language - never said it wasn't. The Spirit gives to our spirit a language to speak forth and that language is not known by the speaker. "When people speak of tongues" - we quote exactly what God says concerning the matter. Others can just accept what God says or remain ignorant of these spiritual matters. Just pray about it and trust what God says.

 

[Enow]

I did not click on your links and have no intention of doing so.

The first link indicating non-Christians speak in tongues, is completely erroneous as a person must be born again in order to have the manifestation of the Spirit in evidence in his/her life. So are you claiming that these "non-christians" are really born again believers?

Same question for your second link indicating those in heathen religions speak in tongues. Are you claiming that these heathen religion followers are born again? A person can speak in tongues only if he/she is born again.

So if these folks (the non-christians of the first link and the heathen religionists of the second link) are not born again, they are not speaking in tongues.

You are not understanding the concern I am sharing here.

I believe God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips for speaking unto the people ONLY, because there is a supernatural tongue that has been in the world before Pentecost that is not God's gifts of tongues but is just vain & profane babbling nonsense. Isaiah 8:19 testifies of it being in the occult.

That is why it is circumspect to me when believers insists that God would switch mode on the use of tongues for speaking unto the people and suddenly, it is for private use when it comes with no interpretation. Why? God would help us prove everything and abstain from all appearances of evil.

1 Thessalonians 5:[SUP]21 [/SUP]Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.[SUP]22 [/SUP]Abstain from all appearance of evil.[SUP]23 [/SUP]And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.[SUP] 24 [/SUP]Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

So how can a former voodooists but now a believer, know if he has repented of his former practices, free from those spirits, and that kind of tongue if God has two different ways to use tongues?

How can he convince his former friends that are still voodooists that Jesus has changed him if he has a tongue that supposedly sound the same as the ones they are still using?

How can the former voodooist convince the assembly that he does not practice voodooism any more nor that tongue if God's gift of tongues can also be used for private use as coming without interpretation?

So I am not saying that those unbelieving sinners are saved because they speak in tongues; I am saying that there has been a supernatural tongue in the world that is just babbling nonsense before Pentecost came with God's gift of tongues of other men's lips to speak unto the people.

1 Timothy 4:1-2 prophesied a warning that some shall depart from faith in giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.

1 John 4:1-6 has the apostle John warning believers not to believe every spirit but test them; and that test is any spirit coming over a believer separate from salvation is NOT the Holy Spirit because He has been in the believer as promised by faith since he has been saved. Those that receive tongues by that second pehnomenon, John has pointed out that they can speak as the world speaks as that is from the spirit of error which is vain & babbling nonsense.

AND those who experience that other phenomenon, calling it the second blessing, do so for saved believers to seek after in receiving what they believe is the Holy Spirit but by a sign of tongues when tongues are not supposed to serve as a sign or proof towards the believers for anything. 1 Corinthians 14:22

Paul warned against those that would move away from the simplicity of the gospel and stepping out on the Bridegroom by preaching another Jesus or another spirit to receive in 2 Corinthians 11:1-4

Paul reminded believers hwo to examine themselves in the faith and that is Jesus Christ is in us; 2 Corinthians 13:5

The church at Thyatira was warned to repent of spiritual fornication as they were uttering the depths of Satan for which they speak or risk being left behind, cast into the bed of the great tribulation as any believer in unrepentant inqiuity will also be.

That is the line of discernment in testing that tongue for private use as not of Him because there is no way you can abstain from that appearance fo evil from that kind of supernatural tongue in the world.

In agreement that "no believer needs tongues to get closer to God".

Not in agreement that praying in tongues "robs the believer".

Then tell me what mode that tongue was in the last time you had used that tongue privately? Was it in prayer mode? Self edification mode? Giving of thanks mode? Or any of those so called benefits listed for private use but yet somehow by not knowing what that tongue just did, you say it does not rob you?

A brother told me that he was praying normally and then the Holy Spirit cut in, interrupting his normal praying and he began to speak in tongues. So in that sense, I can say praying in tongues can rob the believer in that way too, thinking the Holy Spirit took care of everything so when it was time to quit praying, he never continued to finish praying normally to God in giving his requests.

So I say better to know what you had prayed for so you can give the Father genuine thanks in Jesus's name for known answers to prayers.

But if you like that kind of tongue, regardless of the appearance of evil around it, then there is nothing more to say in sharing my concern for those that insists God can use tongues for private use too. I leave you in His hands, sister.

 

[Waggles]

(ASV) How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? And scoffers delight them in scoffing,
And fools hate knowledge?
Proverbs 1:22

The wise in heart will receive commandments; But a prating fool shall fall.
Proverbs 10:8

Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding; But that which is in the inward
part of fools is made known.
Proverbs 14:33

Answer not a fool according to his folly, Lest thou also be like unto him.
Proverbs 26:4
[SUB][/SUB][SUB][/SUB]

 

[Billyd]

There is one God, one Son, and one Holy Spirit. When communicate among themselves, they need only one tongue (language).

If man is speaking in the spirit, he must be using that spiritual tongue. If man is speaking to man, since the days of babel, he need to either speak the tongue of the hearer, or have a translator. Otherwise confusion exist, and God is not the author of confusion.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I believe God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips for speaking unto the people ONLY

And in Posts #242 and #246 I have provided Scripture which indicates otherwise.

You choose not to believe that Scripture due to your fear that someone speaking in tongues in his/her private prayer life is actually speaking forth profane babbling in which a spirit which is "NOT the Holy Spirit" is somehow influencing him/her.

because there is a supernatural tongue that has been in the world before Pentecost that is not God's gifts of tongues but is just vain & profane babbling nonsense. Isaiah 8:19 testifies of it being in the occult.

The fact that this so-called "supernatural tongue . . . has been in the world before Pentecost" should alert you to the fact that it is not speaking in tongues because prior to the Day of Pentecost, speaking in tongues was not available. The manifestation of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues has been available only from Day of Pentecost and after.

That is why it is circumspect to me when believers insists that God would switch mode on the use of tongues for speaking unto the people and suddenly, it is for private use when it comes with no interpretation. Why? God would help us prove everything and abstain from all appearances of evil.

1 Thessalonians 5:[SUP]21 [/SUP]Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.[SUP]22 [/SUP]Abstain from all appearance of evil.[SUP]23 [/SUP]And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.[SUP] 24 [/SUP]Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

It is not "evil" to speak in tongues.

Would to God you would believe 1 Thess 5:24 Faithful is He that calleth you, Who also will do it. God works within the believer to bring forth the manifestation. He is faithful and will not give you anything counterfeit.

According to 1 Cor 12:10-11, the manifestation of kinds of tongues is worked with in the believer by the one and the selfsame Spirit. It is not another Spirit as you keep insisting.

Notice that 1 Cor 12:10 says to another, kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues.

You have the verse reading: "to another kinds of tongues with interpretation of tongues". You are combining into one that which God has separated into two.

And each manifestation has its place in the life of the believer:

If the believer is in the congregation and there is no interpretation, the manifestation of tongues is to be spoken silently to God.

If the believer is by him/herself, the manifestation of tongues can be spoken out loud or silently.

If the believer is in the congregation and speaks in tongues out loud, the manifestation of interpretation of tongues is to follow.

So how can a former voodooists but now a believer, know if he has repented of his former practices, free from those spirits, and that kind of tongue if God has two different ways to use tongues?

How can he convince his former friends that are still voodooists that Jesus has changed him if he has a tongue that supposedly sound the same as the ones they are still using?

How can the former voodooist convince the assembly that he does not practice voodooism any more nor that tongue if God's gift of tongues can also be used for private use as coming without interpretation?

So I am not saying that those unbelieving sinners are saved because they speak in tongues; I am saying that there has been a supernatural tongue in the world that is just babbling nonsense before Pentecost came with God's gift of tongues of other men's lips to speak unto the people.

You really do not believe the "former voodooist" can tell difference?

In John 14:20, Jesus told His disciples At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

In 2 Cor 13:5 we are told Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

In other words, we know that we know it is Jesus Christ within us. Not "another spirit" as you keep insisting.

A brother told me that he was praying normally and then the Holy Spirit cut in, interrupting his normal praying and he began to speak in tongues. So in that sense, I can say praying in tongues can rob the believer in that way too, thinking the Holy Spirit took care of everything so when it was time to quit praying, he never continued to finish praying normally to God in giving his requests.

How do you know he "never continued to finish praying normally to God in giving his requests"?

God knows our hearts. He knows what we are going to pray for before we even utter a word. And now you want to insist that when that One and the selfsame Spirit works within the born again one, He is going to somehow miss that issue that is upon our hearts? Why? Because He doesn't "remember"? Because He doesn't know? Because He's really another spirit which is "NOT the Holy Spirit" (which is completely contrary to what is written in Scripture)?

But if you like that kind of tongue, regardless of the appearance of evil around it, then there is nothing more to say in sharing my concern for those that insists God can use tongues for private use too.

The "appearance of evil" is in your own mind.

I told you yesterday (Post #231) and I reiterate now:

You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the manifestation of the Spirit.

God's instruction to you is found in 1 Cor 14:38 if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant and 1 Cor 14:39 forbid not to speak with tongues.

I leave you in His hands, sister.

Thank you, Enow. No better place to be than in His Hands. I pray you also rest easy in the Hands of our Father God.

 

[garee]

Yes all languages have meaning. Scripture says that when one speaks with the Spirit, i.e. speaking in tongues, one is speaking to God. When one is in a group of believers, the tongue should be interpreted. Both are important. God does not want anyone ignorant of spiritual matters. Glossa does mean a language - never said it wasn't. The Spirit gives to our spirit a language to speak forth and that language is not known by the speaker. "When people speak of tongues" - we quote exactly what God says concerning the matter. Others can just accept what God says or remain ignorant of these spiritual matters. Just pray about it and trust what God says.

Others can just accept what God says even if they do not understand what he is saying ?The gospel of misunderstanding?

The language is not unknown to the speaker. The word unknown was added. It’s prophecy, the interpretation of God. A tongue is a sign to those who oppose prophecy.(the will of God).

Why ask another for their private interpretation if they speak the same language as the one being spoken to ?

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2Pe 1:20

Prophecy is not after the will of any man’s private interpretation called heresy (personal commentary) In that way there must be heresy among us.. .So that we do not seek the approval of men the wrong manner of spirit . There is damnable heresy.. it clearly denies the grace of God.

It would make no sense to speak words without meaning where another 3 rd person sitting there would have to interpret it to a person that speaks the same language. It would be a rehash of tower of Babel confusion and disorder. A house full of barbarians no communication.

1Co 14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

Communication is a two way street . Speak words you understand and hope the other hears what you are saying. And when he responds the same way .he hopes you understand

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches not some one else's interpretation like that of the Nicolaitanes. Or the private interpretation of father of lies .

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman,
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, "Ye shall not" eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:Gen 3:1

 

[Dino246]

It simply amazes me that certain individuals continue to ignore plain, clear Scripture verses in 1 Corinthians 14 that give room for speaking in tongues without interpretation. There are all kinds of attempts made to get around these verses, and instead to obfuscate the issue by pulling in verses from elsewhere and by misrepresenting what is in the chapter.

v. 2 the one who speaks in a tongue ... to God ... for no one understands; in his spirit he speaks mysteries
v. 4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself
v. 13 let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret
v. 14 if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays
v. 28 if there is no interpreter, he is to keep silent in the church, and let him speak to himself and to God

My point is this: these verses allow the one speaking in tongues to do so privately, without interpretation. This is simple, basic, straightforward reading. There is little interpretation of the text required to understand this, yet somehow people don't get it. Perhaps a brief commentary will be helpful.

v. 2 the one who speaks in a tongue ... to God ... for no one understands; in his spirit he speaks mysteries
He (or she) is speaking in a real language that is unknown both to himself and to the hearers, but known to God.

v. 4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself
Edification is always a good thing in Scripture (if you don't believe me, check it out for yourself); it is building up in a positive sense, not in pride or arrogance. 1 Cor 12:7 says that the gifts are for edifying the church but that verse doesn't preclude edifying the individual, who is part of the church.

v. 13 let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret
There is no second person in this verse; the one who is speaking in tongues is the one who is to pray to interpret. That doesn't preclude others praying to interpret; but it obviously doesn't preclude the one speaking!

v. 14 if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays
The spirit is praying here, not the mind. The mind may also pray, in the language known to the speaker. That's the gist of the paragraph. One can do both!

v. 28 if there is no interpreter, he is to keep silent in the church, and let him speak to himself and to God
If the Holy Spirit does not manifest an interpretation, the tongue-speaker is not to speak aloud in tongues, but he may speak quietly to the Lord. Because it is between the speaker and God, it is private, and continues to be without interpretation.

None of this claims that tongues without interpretation is better than with interpretation, or that tongues without interpretation is better than prophecy. Sadly, that is what is repeatedly and erroneously claimed. What it does is leave room for speaking in tongues without interpretation, should one choose to use the gift privately in that manner.

 

[UnderGrace]

Paul is not advocating speaking in a tongue (glossa, language) as a private prayer language

The key point is that the context of what Paul is writing is one of correction not instruction

1 Corinthians 14:2a – “For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men, but to God; for no one understands.”

Paul is criticizing the Corinthian church for their self-gratification, not advocating a personal prayer language of tongues. Context demands condemnation, not confirmation.

“In his spirit he speaks mysteries.”

Paul’s goal is to emphasize the worthlessness of uninterrupted tongues as compared to prophecy as they provide no edification, exhortation or encouragement. He is not advocating a second type of tongues to be used in prayer

God reveals biblical mysteries (Rev. 1:20) to us through the Apostle (Rom. 11:25)

He does not have us speak mysteries to Him similar to the demands of pagan deities.

1 Corinthians 14:4a – “One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself”

Again, Paul is not validating the gift for personal use but condemning the abuse of the gift for violating its intended purpose for the common good (12:7). The Corinthians were also disregarding the principle of love, which “does not seek its own” (13:5)


Please answer

If an individual could be edified without understanding, then why not a whole group of believers?
Yet this is not allowed correct?

It simply amazes me that certain individuals continue to ignore plain, clear Scripture verses in 1 Corinthians 14 that give room for speaking in tongues without interpretation. There are all kinds of attempts made to get around these verses, and instead to obfuscate the issue by pulling in verses from elsewhere and by misrepresenting what is in the chapter.

v. 2 the one who speaks in a tongue ... to God ... for no one understands; in his spirit he speaks mysteries
v. 4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself
v. 13 let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret
v. 14 if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays
v. 28 if there is no interpreter, he is to keep silent in the church, and let him speak to himself and to God

My point is this: these verses allow the one speaking in tongues to do so privately, without interpretation. This is simple, basic, straightforward reading. There is little interpretation of the text required to understand this, yet somehow people don't get it. Perhaps a brief commentary will be helpful.

v. 2 the one who speaks in a tongue ... to God ... for no one understands; in his spirit he speaks mysteries
He (or she) is speaking in a real language that is unknown both to himself and to the hearers, but known to God.

v. 4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself
Edification is always a good thing in Scripture (if you don't believe me, check it out for yourself); it is building up in a positive sense, not in pride or arrogance. 1 Cor 12:7 says that the gifts are for edifying the church but that verse doesn't preclude edifying the individual, who is part of the church.

v. 13 let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret
There is no second person in this verse; the one who is speaking in tongues is the one who is to pray to interpret. That doesn't preclude others praying to interpret; but it obviously doesn't preclude the one speaking!

v. 14 if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays
The spirit is praying here, not the mind. The mind may also pray, in the language known to the speaker. That's the gist of the paragraph. One can do both!

v. 28 if there is no interpreter, he is to keep silent in the church, and let him speak to himself and to God
If the Holy Spirit does not manifest an interpretation, the tongue-speaker is not to speak aloud in tongues, but he may speak quietly to the Lord. Because it is between the speaker and God, it is private, and continues to be without interpretation.

None of this claims that tongues without interpretation is better than with interpretation, or that tongues without interpretation is better than prophecy. Sadly, that is what is repeatedly and erroneously claimed. What it does is leave room for speaking in tongues without interpretation, should one choose to use the gift privately in that manner.

 

[carl11]

Operating the manifestations of the gift of the Holy Spirit, has nothing to do with adding to the written word of God.

I'm very sorry that you believe God is no longer able to speak to you.

God still speaks but it is through his written word the Bible.

 

[Enow]

Can any tongue speaker tell us what benefit they had received from using tongues privately the last time?

You have praying in tongues privately. And you have speaking in tongues privately. Two major modes for private tongues.

How can you know what that tongue was doing for private use?

And when you answer that question; then answer what benefit listed for speaking in tongues that you got privately when there are many benefits supposedly listed for speaking in tongues privately the last time you had spoken in tongues?

And you don't see how you are not coming off as making God look like the author of confusion to non-tongue speakers which is why some of us cannot believe tongues are for private use or that the real God's gift of tongues is in use today at all?

 

[Kavik]

They spoke more than Aramaic and Greek. The people were amazed because those who first spoke in tongues were Galilaeans (Acts 2:7). According to Acts 4:13, when Peter and John were brought before the high priest and the kindred of the high priest (Acts 4:6), Peter and John were considered unlearned and ignorant.

So on Day of Pentecost, all who were gathered there were confounded (Acts 2:6) and they were all amazed and marvelled (Acts 2:7) because they heard these unlearned and ignorant Galilaeans speak in our own tongue, wherein we were born(Acts 2:9).

Parthians, and medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (Acts 2:9).

Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes (Acts 2:10).

Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God (Acts 2:11).


Actually no, they didn’t. Unlearned and ignorant doesn’t equate to not being able to converse in another language. They were Hellenized Jews and also merchants of sorts (fishermen who presumably sold their catches) - no reason to think they weren’t familiar with Greek. If indeed, Peter traveled to Rome, he would have spoken Greek, not Latin.

If you examine the list you have above, there is not one language mentioned; in fact, nowhere in the entire Pentecost narrative is any one language ever mentioned by name. The list is of geographical places, various lands. If you look at the actual lands mentioned, they are specifically the lands of the Jewish Diaspora. The Diaspora can be divided between eastern and Western. The lands of the Western Diaspora had been Hellenized for centuries; Greek had long replaced any languages formerly native to those lands. So, many lands, only one language native to those lands. Something akin to say America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and England – many countries, but only one language: English (not an exact analogy as there are many ‘native’ language still spoken in these places, but you can kind of get the gist). Eastern Diaspora was Aramaic speaking. Jews in these countries were like any other immigrant people today, even here in America. They lived in ethnic communities, preserved their language as their cultural and religious identity much the same as say Spanish communities in the US do. Sure, many speak English in varying degrees, but the language at home is Spanish. Same with the Eastern Diaspora – sure, some spoke the language native to the country they were living in, but their ‘mother tongue’, the language used at home, the language they were born into, was Aramaic.

So, if the list does not describe linguistic diversity, why was it even included? Also, why were two major lands of the Diaspora seemingly conveniently ‘left out’ (Syria and Cyprus)?

The most prevalent school of thought by far is that the list was placed in the narrative for political reasons (with Syria purposely omitted, and the nations/territories listed in a very specific order). Indeed, this list from Luke, as one writer puts it, “is anti-Roman political propaganda witch advocates kenotic politics at its finest.”

Expanding on this idea in great detail is a paper written by a Martin Hengel of Tübingen University.

Rather than try to paraphrase from them, I’ve included the links to the articles below so the reader may see them in their entirety:

the john 3:30 group: Luke’s List of Nations, Acts 2:9-13

https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_2000_b_01_Hengel_IoudaiaGeography.pdf

The "actual ability of speaking" in tongues is the gift of holy spirit which is given to every believer at the time he/she is born again.

The ability to speak a foreign language (the Biblical meaning of ‘speaking in tongues’) does not require one to be born again.

When the one and the selfsame Spirit energizes within the believer, the manifestation is the result. According to Acts 2:4, the Spirit gives the utterance.

The Spirit may indeed inspire one what to say, but not the language used to say it in.

I wanted to clarify that the purpose of manifestation of tongues is not preaching or teaching. The Lord Jesus Christ gives the gift ministries for that purpose (Eph 4:11).

Yes, he may give the gift of ministries, but when one is ministering to either foreigners or in another country, s/he will need to learn the language spoken (‘speak with new tongues’).


Glossa does mean a language - never said it wasn't. The Spirit gives to our spirit a language to speak forth and that language is not known by the speaker.

Except, no matter how you slice and dice it, modern tongues is just not language.


When looking at ‘Corinthians’, one must keep in mind that, when you really get down to it, it’s simply a letter written by Paul in response to various issues happening in Corinth.

Being a multi-cultural and multi-lingual international crossroads city strategically situated on not one, but two seas (Aegean and Adriatic, I think), everyday communication in general must have been a pain; Greek was the language of Corinth and the “English” of its day. Most merchants would have spoken it in varying degrees, but it was probably not uncommon to walk down a main street and hear ten different languages in the matter of several hundred yards.

It’s unfortunate that we do not have a copy of the original ‘letter of complaint’ sent to him – I’m pretty sure it would instantly clear up the whole issue of “tongues”.

One can kind of imagine that section of the letter sent to Paul – “Hey, we have a situation here. When we’re trying to have a public worship, we got a bunch of foreigners attending that start praying aloud in their own languages – no clue what they’re saying, but it’s really disrupting the entire service. Please advise.”

One has to wonder if, in a very eloquent manner, Paul is sending him back a sort of “Captain Obvious” response: “Have them pray that they can learn enough Greek to make themselves understood so everyone can benefit; but obviously that’s not going to happen overnight. In the meantime, try and find an interpreter (again, so everyone can benefit), but if one can’t be found, tell him to keep quiet and pray silently so as not to cause any disruption.”

Throughout this passage in the letter, Paul is calling for clarity and understanding – something that in the main gathering places in a city such as Corinth, was probably an exception rather than the norm.

When it’s looked at in a more historical, real-life context, there just isn’t anything there that doesn’t refer to problems with real languages in a real-life situation.

 

[Dino246]

“In his spirit he speaks mysteries.”

Paul’s goal is to emphasize the worthlessness of uninterrupted tongues as compared to prophecy as they provide no edification, exhortation or encouragement. He is not advocating a second type of tongues to be used in prayer

I believe you meant, "uninterpreted", and your comment is refuted by 1 Cor 14:4 "One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself". Yes, edification of the church is greater; that is not contested.

God reveals biblical mysteries (Rev. 1:20) to us through the Apostle (Rom. 11:25)

He does not have us speak mysteries to Him similar to the demands of pagan deities.

Pagan worship practices are irrelevant. Paul is not referencing them in these chapters. The word "mysteries" simply means "things unknown to men". There is no esoteric meaning to it in this context.

1 Corinthians 14:4a – “One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself”

Again, Paul is not validating the gift for personal use but condemning the abuse of the gift for violating its intended purpose for the common good (12:7). The Corinthians were also disregarding the principle of love, which “does not seek its own” (13:5)

12:7 gives a general purpose for the gifts. It doesn't preclude edification of the individual within the body. When one person receives healing, do all receive healing? Paul is explaining how to use the manifestation properly in the church. If Paul were simply condemning its abuse, he would not likely have summarized the passage by saying, "and do not forbid speaking in tongues."

Since you seem to believe that "edifies" is a bad thing, find the word (or any variant) in Scripture that is clearly negative, not counting this one which you claim to be negative.

Please answer
If an individual could be edified without understanding, then why not a whole group of believers?
Yet this is not allowed correct?

Paul states that when a person speaks in tongues, he edifies himself. The context suggests that without interpretation, the church is not edified, but it doesn't even hint that it is in any way injured. Further, the context makes it clear that the church is edified when the tongues-message is interpreted. Nothing further is stated regarding the whole group; to answer your question further, I would have to resort to arguing from silence.

If someone (whom you appreciate!) gives you a hug when you're feeling down, do you feel better? Are you 'edified'? Do you understand it? Does your mind rationally process everything that happens in your body and your inner being when you receive a hug? Paul says that speaking in tongues edifies the speaker, and edification is a good thing. I don't need to understand everything rationally to accept the validity of it.

As to your last sentence, "Yet this is not allowed correct?" Is it allowed incorrect? Yes, I'm being a grammar Nazi.

 

[notuptome]

(ASV) How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? And scoffers delight them in scoffing,
And fools hate knowledge?
Proverbs 1:22

The wise in heart will receive commandments; But a prating fool shall fall.
Proverbs 10:8

Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding; But that which is in the inward
part of fools is made known.
Proverbs 14:33

Answer not a fool according to his folly, Lest thou also be like unto him.
Proverbs 26:4

You know that with what measure you judge others you will also be judged? Unwise to accuse others of being fools as you may appear as one yourself.

Mat 7:1-6

For the cause of Christ
Roger