Question About Tongues

[convallaria]

Let's stop scripture bashing and look at the benefits of tongues, just for a change.

Some time back I had been interacting with a guy who was pissed at and rejecting God because he believed God had sent his girlfriend to hell because she had supposedly died without accepting Him. I was praying over this in my prayer tongue, speaking mysteries I knew little to nothing about. While praying about her I got an image of these legions of angels rushing into what I interpreted was a cave. When I shared this with him, he got quiet and said "she died in a car wreck under a freeway overpass". Not an exact match but it was close enough to comfort him and make him think that maybe she hadn't died 'alone'. How would I have ever known that? I didn't and couldn't. But the Holy Spirit knew, and thru my yielding to the Spirit, the Spirit clued me into enough of the mystery to help change this guy's attitude about God.

That's what it is all about my friends. The gifts are given to us to fill in blanks we know nothing about. And as long as there are mysteries to be revealed, God will give us the gifts we need to reveal them.

IF we are willing to accept them.

Awesome! Praise God. This is also my experience that there would on occasions be an image, or vision, that would present itself while speaking in tongues and turn out to be the information needed to shed light on a problem as seen from God's point of view.

I know that the Lord cares for His children so deeply, and will respond clearly to the honest cries of an anguished heart.

 

[convallaria]

He left the country not long after this... I don't know if he ever became saved but I do know a lot of his anger towards God was mitigated.

He likely was saved already if he was concerned that his girlfiend died before she received the Lord. He wouldn't be thinking that way if he wasn't. Also the fact that God sent comfort through you by His Spirit, and the man received it, shows he wasn't a reprobate, but just needing answers. God does not despise us for needing answers! If we would only ask we would receive!

 

[Ukorin]

I have been given the gift of tongues.
It is not what most of you are describing.

It is a ministry to the lost, not a personal worship experience.

Many of you are describing "the groanings of the Spirit".
The groanings of the Spirit are not a positive thing!!!

You have foolishly programmed yourself to feel conviction as if it is elation.

 

[convallaria]

I have been given the gift of tongues.
It is not what most of you are describing.

It is a ministry to the lost, not a personal worship experience.

Many of you are describing "the groanings of the Spirit".
The groanings of the Spirit are not a positive thing!!!

You have foolishly programmed yourself to feel conviction as if it is elation.

Careful with the accusations of foolishness:

1 Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.



However you demonstrate an important point. Paul speaks of diverse tongues, meaning there is more than one gift of tongues. My personal experience of tongues is in intercession like Ricky mentioned, and in private prayer, also worship is another: yes! Paul sang in the Spirit!

I have witnessed the prophetic tongue gift which must be spoken aloud in the congregation, and I know that I do not have that one. Not yet, anyway. Why should I rule anything out?

I am interested in what you say because there may indeed be more tongue gifts than I know of. Can you explain practically how your tongue ministers to the lost? Something indeed to praise God for!

 

[Ukorin]

Being in the Spirit, singing in the Spirit, and being moved by the Spirit are not different forms of tongues.

Tongues are one small and specific gift.

It deals with inter-lingual communication.

When on the field, I am sometimes given the ability to preach to people who don't understand English, and yet they understand me, and respond to the call.
Twice I have been given prophecy while preaching in this mode. Both times, one of my brethren has stepped forward to interpret for the English speakers.

Speaking "sha hee milah, haru ma alle ahhlie" does not mean you are speaking in tongues. It means you are "scatting". It can be a very freeing and expressive (even spiritual) experience. But it is not tongues. It is just expressive, rhythmic gibberish.

 

[Ukorin]

The false tongues are characterized by fast either "esk oohs kier iy" type sounds (false Slavic), or slower "elle ah eh koreheh iyeem" type sounds (false Hebrew).
There are infinite individual variations of such scat, but recognizable by the repetitious nature of the phrasing, and rhythmic breaks.
It is often learned, by copying others who pretend to speak tongues, which is why so much of it sounds so predictably similar. But creativity in expression is what makes false tongues so enjoyable, and what makes each person feel unique while chanting their own made up language.

If you've ever listened to jazz scat, you will understand how readily easy it is for a person to speak nonsensical rhythmic syllables.

 

[convallaria]

Being in the Spirit, singing in the Spirit, and being moved by the Spirit are not different forms of tongues.

Tongues are one small and specific gift.

It deals with inter-lingual communication.

When on the field, I am sometimes given the ability to preach to people who don't understand English, and yet they understand me, and respond to the call.
Twice I have been given prophecy while preaching in this mode. Both times, one of my brethren has stepped forward to interpret for the English speakers.

Speaking "sha hee milah, haru ma alle ahhlie" does not mean you are speaking in tongues. It means you are "scatting". It can be a very freeing and expressive (even spiritual) experience. But it is not tongues. It is just expressive, rhythmic gibberish.

Thanks but I will stick with what God says.

We dare not limit God in His working to what our narrow understanding permits. While I am glad that you said you have personally ministered in a prophetic tongue with interpretation, I am somewhat hesitant to believe it when you start by calling us foolish and then go on to call other tongues as described by Paul false tongues and even gibberish.

Do you have an online Bible? If so, put "unknown tongues" in the search and study what scriptures it yields. Then maybe come back and we can discuss where you misunderstood.

 

[Galahad]

Does this mean that if a man speaks in an unknown tongue then he has to speak with at least one other man and at the most two other men?

-or-

Does it mean that if a man speaks in an unknown tongue then the unknown tongue is limited to one of three unknown tongues?

If the first question were changed to a statement, it would be correct. To help reestablish order and clarity in the assembly of the saints, Paul (the writer) instructs the Corinthians how to use the gifts. And the statement would reflect such.

The second question is good. Very good. Two or three sentences? The speaker and the sequence of speaker and then interpreter is the instruction from Paul.

However, tongue speakers are not to take up all the time in the assembly, so only 3 tongue speakers at the most in any one assembly.

Notice "let one interpret and that by course."
This might help explain:
One man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.
Another man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.
A third man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.

Here's another arrangement:
One man speaks in tongue. He interprets.
Another man speaks in tongue. He interprets.
A third man speaks in tongue. Some other man interprets.
(See Verse 13)

Here's an incorrect arrangement.
One man speaks in a tongue. No one interprets.
Another man speaks in a tongue. Same.
A third man speaks in a tongue. Two interpret.

Hope this helps.

 

[convallaria]

If the first question were changed to a statement, it would be correct. To help reestablish order and clarity in the assembly of the saints, Paul (the writer) instructs the Corinthians how to use the gifts. And the statement would reflect such.

The second question is good. Very good. Two or three sentences? The speaker and the sequence of speaker and then interpreter is the instruction from Paul.

However, tongue speakers are not to take up all the time in the assembly, so only 3 tongue speakers at the most in any one assembly.

Notice "let one interpret and that by course."
This might help explain:
One man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.
Another man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.
A third man speaks in a tongue. After he is done speaking, another man interprets.

Here's another arrangement:
One man speaks in tongue. He interprets.
Another man speaks in tongue. He interprets.
A third man speaks in tongue. Some other man interprets.
(See Verse 13)

Here's an incorrect arrangement.
One man speaks in a tongue. No one interprets.
Another man speaks in a tongue. Same.
A third man speaks in a tongue. Two interpret.

Hope this helps.

Only partially.

1 Cor 14

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: 19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

That takes care of the tongue gift that is given for use in the assembly, i.e. the church.

BUT

Paul is clearly speaking in tongues much more than just in the church setting, while in the church as he sayshe prefers to speak with understanding as above, for the benefit of the hearers.



Verse 4: He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Jude 1:20
But ye, beloved, building up yourselves (edifying yourself) on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

So to keep ourselves in the love of God and built up in our most holy faith also when NOT in the church we pray in the Spirit, i.e.tongues, privately.

This is the other tongue gift that many of us have been discussing here. One is for public declaration with an interpreter; the other is for private edification.

Edification is building ourselves up in the Spirit. It is not puffing ourselves up. The Holy Spirit is God so that would be impossible.

 

[RickyZ]

He likely was saved already if he was concerned that his girlfiend died before she received the Lord. He wouldn't be thinking that way if he wasn't. Also the fact that God sent comfort through you by His Spirit, and the man received it, shows he wasn't a reprobate, but just needing answers. God does not despise us for needing answers! If we would only ask we would receive!

The last I talked to him he said he wasn't saved, but it was obvious that the Spirit was wooing him!

 

[RickyZ]

I have been given the gift of tongues.
It is not what most of you are describing.

It is a ministry to the lost, not a personal worship experience.

Many of you are describing "the groanings of the Spirit".
The groanings of the Spirit are not a positive thing!!!

You have foolishly programmed yourself to feel conviction as if it is elation.

The Spiritual tongue is, as many have said, a spiritual language. Language expresses all forms of emotion. It might at one time express elation, then another time remorse. In another instance language can express love, and another anger. You can't really put this kind of thing into a box and say it's only used for such-and-such. It is used as the Spirit leads.

And yes you are right there are a lot of people who express in "scat". The key to discerning a true tongue is that it in some way glorifies God.

 

[notuptome]

The Spiritual tongue is, as many have said, a spiritual language. Language expresses all forms of emotion. It might at one time express elation, then another time remorse. In another instance language can express love, and another anger. You can't really put this kind of thing into a box and say it's only used for such-and-such. It is used as the Spirit leads.

And yes you are right there are a lot of people who express in "scat". The key to discerning a true tongue is that it in some way glorifies God.

A Spiritual language would be the language of scripture. The word of God is Spirit.

You just cannot make stuff up and call it what you want.

There is a way that seemeth right to a man but the end thereof is destruction.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shotgunner]

Being in the Spirit, singing in the Spirit, and being moved by the Spirit are not different forms of tongues.

Tongues are one small and specific gift.

It deals with inter-lingual communication.

When on the field, I am sometimes given the ability to preach to people who don't understand English, and yet they understand me, and respond to the call.
Twice I have been given prophecy while preaching in this mode. Both times, one of my brethren has stepped forward to interpret for the English speakers.

Speaking "sha hee milah, haru ma alle ahhlie" does not mean you are speaking in tongues. It means you are "scatting". It can be a very freeing and expressive (even spiritual) experience. But it is not tongues. It is just expressive, rhythmic gibberish.

You are incorrect. Paul clearly speaks of tongues which no man understands but he is speaking mysteries to God. Paul says he will sing in the Spirit and in his understanding also. Cleary indicating that singing in the Spirit is not singing in his understanding. Just read the scriptures without any church doctrine glasses.

 

[shotgunner]

A Spiritual language would be the language of scripture. The word of God is Spirit.

You just cannot make stuff up and call it what you want.

There is a way that seemeth right to a man but the end thereof is destruction.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Wrong again. If singing in the Spirit was singing in scripture Paul would not have said, "I will sing in the Spirit and in my understanding also", unless he couldn't understand scripture.

 

[RickyZ]

A Spiritual language would be the language of scripture. The word of God is Spirit.

You just cannot make stuff up and call it what you want.

There is a way that seemeth right to a man but the end thereof is destruction.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Roger Roger roger... how sad that you are so blind. I noticed that you didn't say anything about the example I gave from personal experience, you know, the one where while praying in tongues something was revealed to me that I had no way of knowing, and that helped another in their walk towards God..? You know, if use of a tongue brings another to God I just don't see how that can be considered destruction. Seems the only thing that has been destroyed here is YOUR faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit.

I do wish you would remove that tagline "For the cause of Christ" from your posts, because clearly you aren't.

 

[RickyZ]

Wrong again. If singing in the Spirit was singing in scripture Paul would not have said, "I will sing in the Spirit and in my understanding also", unless he couldn't understand scripture.

Now class, let's all sing the book of Leviticus.

Rog is a silly man, isn't he?

 

[BarlyGurl]

Now class, let's all sing the book of Leviticus.

If you insist... but it isn't going to be a very pretty song!!!!

 

[notuptome]

You are incorrect. Paul clearly speaks of tongues which no man understands but he is speaking mysteries to God. Paul says he will sing in the Spirit and in his understanding also. Cleary indicating that singing in the Spirit is not singing in his understanding. Just read the scriptures without any church doctrine glasses.

You know you're making this up right?

Read out of the scriptures what is there do not read into the scriptures what you want them to say.

What did Israel sing? We have the Psalms as evidence of what they sang at least in part.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

Roger Roger roger... how sad that you are so blind. I noticed that you didn't say anything about the example I gave from personal experience, you know, the one where while praying in tongues something was revealed to me that I had no way of knowing, and that helped another in their walk towards God..? You know, if use of a tongue brings another to God I just don't see how that can be considered destruction. Seems the only thing that has been destroyed here is YOUR faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit.

I do wish you would remove that tagline "For the cause of Christ" from your posts, because clearly you aren't.

Hopefully you will be encouraged to seek out that it means.

That I would not place much credibility in your personal experiences should be obvious especially when it contradicts scripture.

God is able to use the gospel preached out of contention as well as the gospel taught out of knowledge and love.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[RickyZ]

Hopefully you will be encouraged to seek out that it means.

That I would not place much credibility in your personal experiences should be obvious especially when it contradicts scripture.

God is able to use the gospel preached out of contention as well as the gospel taught out of knowledge and love.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

You know why I pick on you Rog? 'Cause you make yourself such an easy target... you don't even TRY to understand.

Here's a good one... how Roger interprets scripture:

Why, them must be cows!