Is Speaking in Tongues still available today?

[Jimbone]

I didn't realize how harshly I worded my fist comment here was until I just reread it, and I wish I would have approached it with a little more understanding. I would like to apologize for being unnecessarily offensive and not clear fully because of the way I presented my argument, I honestly didn't feel like I was being rude nor was I writing it in anger or offence, but looking at it again today I see how some may have been offended and misunderstood what I was trying to say.

I do not believe this at all negates that there are some that I think may be lifting up the gift of tongues up WAY too high, I can talk about it better.

Since I came across so harsh that first time I hope this time I word it with more respect so we can honestly discuss it.
Also I read the same bible, so throwing walls of "proof text" at me is not engaging honestly. I know and understand the few verses that would allow for a personal prayer, possibly in an angelic language that we can pray to God in. That was why I specifically said that the first time too. This "angelic language" can even have a place in the church house, if there is someone interpreting it. I believe there is plenty of room for tongues even today, but we have to be careful and not take it too far, nor raise it too high.
Of course if I'm dead wrong on something then please show me where, but let's not try to built soundproof scripture forts around each other.

I do NOT believe the practice of everyone in the church speaking in tongues at the same time without understanding what's being said, is biblical at all. I think speaking tongues in church without it being one or two at a time and interpreted, is unbiblical. What's the point? I am very against the teaching that says you WILL speak in tongues if you're save, that tongues is THE evidence you're saved. I honestly don't think it should even be taught as "proof" you are saved, although I understand where that comes from and there's a lot more nuance I'd want to add to this to clarify what I mean more precisely. Also I'm not accusing anyone here of teaching any of this, I'm just using teachings I have heard about tongues.

Anytime we see tongues happen in the bible we are told exactly what it is, it's believers speaking in languages they'd never learned for the purpose of spreading the Good News. Honestly I couldn't tell you if the miracle took place in the speakers mouth, or in the hearers ear. There is one verse in Acts that makes it seem like when they were speaking that each person heard him in there own tongue, so I don't want to try to act like I know either, I just think it should be approached rationally.

The point I was making about other groups and people speaking in tongues was not that it's ONLY an occultist practice, or that I don't believe God uses it today, or that no believer should do it. I wish I would have made this point better last time, but my point is that BECAUSE it can be counterfeited and copied so easily, we need to be very careful how much importance we put on it, in my opinion.
As a personal thing between you and God, something that brings you closer to Him in truth, how could any believer be against this? That was my point, not at all that everyone that does it is pagan, or that I think it can't be used to move the believer closer to God, I just believe it's our duty to read His word and get to know it well enough to only do these things as He wills and to see through any deceptions that come along.

I hope this one reads a little better and explains what I mean without sounding like I'm calling the whole thing bad.

 

[tylerbones1313]

To respond to this let me say:
1. You will notice in the King James Bible that the word "unknown" is in italics. Which means that the translators believed they were helping the reader, whereas it has led to a lot of confusion. Had they simply written language or languages all this controversy would not have come about.

2. In Scripture the Greek words are either glossa or glossais. A strict translation would be "language", and as we know from Acts 2 there were about 15 human languages spoken
on the day of Pentecost SUPERNATURALLY.

3. In the 17th century the words "tongue" or "tongues" were also being used commonly for human languages. But today (and in some modern translations) that word should simply be "language".

4. In 1 Corinthians 12-14, all references to "tongues" are to languages. Not "lost languages", since Paul expected a translator to translate what what spoken within the church gatherings.

5. It is obvious that Paul said "tongues of angels" hyperbolically, to make a point. In the Bible you will not find angels speaking in any other languages than actual human languages -- either Hebrew or Aramaic. Greek is the language of the NT, but the people recorded as being spoken to by angels were all Hebrews.

6. When Paul says that tongues are for "a sign" to unbelieving Jews, he is quoting Isaiah 28:11,12: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people [Israel]. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. [Notice what is said at the end "Yet they would not hear]. So on the day of Pentecost, when Jews from all over the Roman empire had gathered in Jerusalem, every Jew (and there were probably 20,000) should have repented and been converted after seeing and hearing this "sign'. But only 3,000 souls were saved that day. Why? Because many "would not hear" the Gospel of Christ. Some mocked, and as we know the religious leaders in Jerusalem persecuted the Hebrew Christians.

7. Paul explains the significance of supernaturally spoken languages 1 Cor 14:21,22: In the law [the Tanakh or OT] 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. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. So believers do not need such a sign. They believe on Christ even though they have not seen Him. Neither do Gentiles need this sign.

8. At the same time Paul makes it clear (in I Cor 12-14) that the spiritual gift of "tongues" is for all Christians during the apostolic period. He also insists that there must be an interpreter to interpret what was spoken. Yet he compares tongues to prophesy and states that prophesying is far, far better than tongues.

9. Paul went on to say that three of those spiritual gifts described would CEASE or be done away with (1 Cor 13:8-10). They were not to continue indefinitely. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. "That which is perfect" is not stated as "He who is perfect " (Christ). "That which is perfect" also means "that which is complete" and Paul prophetically anticipated a complete Bible.

10, Modern tongues are called "glossolalia" or ecstatic utterances. You will not find that word in the Greek NT, since biblical tongues were not ecstatic utterances. And even pagans were practicing such utterances. "Glossolalia occurred among adherents of various ancient religions, including some of the ancient Greek religions." -- Britannica.

Very thorough explanation take a look at my take on some of what you said. I don't want or desire a debate, just a friendly humble and prayerful conversation.

4. In 1 Corinthians 12-14, all references to "tongues" are to languages. Not "lost languages", since Paul expected a translator to translate what what spoken within the church gatherings.

There is a distinction between tongues and interpretation (ie. translator). Both are using the Gift of the Holy Ghost speaking in Tongues. The unknown tongues are language unknown to the one giving the utterance, which today are dead/lost languages. The one interpreting is done in a language for the majority of the congregation to hear, for the edifying of the Body. But still operating of the Holy Ghost speaking in Tongues.

9. Paul went on to say that three of those spiritual gifts described would CEASE or be done away with (1 Cor 13:8-10). They were not to continue indefinitely. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. "That which is perfect" is not stated as "He who is perfect " (Christ). "That which is perfect" also means "that which is complete" and Paul prophetically anticipated a complete Bible.

Here is what I believe about "That which is perfect"

Second Coming of the Messiah (Rapture of the Church):

• This interpretation understands "that which is perfect" as referring to the future coming of the Kingdom of Heaven or the beatific vision (seeing God face to face).
• In this view, the temporary gifts of prophecy, tongues, and partial knowledge will no longer be necessary because believers will experience complete and perfect knowledge and understanding in God's presence.
• This aligns with the verse's emphasis on the enduring nature of love compared to the temporary nature of these spiritual gifts.

 

[tylerbones1313]

I definitely agree with that.....and I think the biggest reason so many reject tongues and prophesy is because they have only seen them demonstrated contrary to the guidelines in 1 Cor. 12, 13, &14.

Or they have only seen "tongues" demonstrated by those who were faking it or even posessed by an unclean spirit. So they see that and their discernment properly registers it as "wrong". But true tongues used in the proper context is uplifting and beautiful.

In my personal experience (which I realize doesn't count for anything but I'm going to testify it anyway), I have never seen tongues demonstrated in a church service. But I did once feel a deep overwhelming conviction to pray....so I tried to pray but realized I had no idea what to pray about. Like, my mind was completely blank (which literally NEVER happens for me...it was really weird). I was kind of freaking out about it, but then I remember that some people mention tongues as a prayer language.....so I quieted myself to see if any words/syllables came to mind. They did...I prayed them quietly in my spirit. It felt peaceful and uplifting. After a few minutes of that I felt like the prayer was over, and the words stopped. To this day I have no idea who or what I was praying for. But it was a good experience.

Please watch. Listen carefully true honest Holy Ghost. Notice the words of the interpretation proving that interpretation is also speaking in Tongues, because phrase "my people" if you just want to hear interpretation goto :54

 

[ResidentAlien]

Please watch. Listen carefully true honest Holy Ghost. Notice the words of the interpretation proving that interpretation is also speaking in Tongues, because phrase "my people" if you just want to hear interpretation goto :54

Well, I have to say they seem to have their act together a lot better than some. But I'm curious, do you know what language the first person was speaking?

 

[tylerbones1313]

Well, I have to say they seem to have their act together a lot better than some. But I'm curious, do you know what language the first person was speaking?

No and most probably wouldn't. But it is definitely a language known today, or sometime in the past or even angelic according to Paul in 1 Cor. 13

 

[Nehemiah6]

The unknown tongues are language unknown to the one giving the utterance, which today are dead/lost languages.

There are NO UNKNOWN tongues in the Bible. I already pointed this out. Please note the word "unknown" -- which is NOT in the Greek text -- is in italics and bracketed below:

For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.

For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruit

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.

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.

The KJV translators could have (and should have) translated strictly according to what is in the Greek text. By inserting "unknown" they caused confusion. Let's take verse 2 as an example:
ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ [glosse = tongue] οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ τῶ θεῷ· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει πνεύματι δὲ λαλεῖ μυστήρια·
Literal interlinear: The'[one] speaking in a tongue not to men speaks, but to God; no one for hears; in the Spirit, however, he utters mysteries.

 

[ResidentAlien]

No and most probably wouldn't. But it is definitely a language known today, or sometime in the past or even angelic according to Paul in 1 Cor. 13

That seems like a bit of a problem, to me anyway. Someone gets up and says something and no one has a clue if it's a know language, an angelic language, or just gibberish. I think that's the problem a lot of people have with tongues.

Just because a group of people follows the "correct" protocol and seem to know what they're doing, that doesn't change the fact they're doing something that could as easily be faked as not. It has to be taken on faith; but a lot of things people put their faith in aren't necessarily on the up-and-up. I've been in church meetings where something very similar happened and it never impressed me as anything extraordinary or miraculous.

 

[Snackersmom]

Please watch. Listen carefully true honest Holy Ghost. Notice the words of the interpretation proving that interpretation is also speaking in Tongues, because phrase "my people" if you just want to hear interpretation goto :54

Thank you for posting this! It did strike me as legit and nothing about it disagreed with scripture, interpretation included. The language sounded vaguely familiar but I don't know which one it was (North African is my closest guess). But Paul said that he spoke in the tongues of men AND angels, so I don't think it would HAVE to be a recognized earthly language.

For the record, I have always believed tongues can be used properly in a church service, I just couldn't testify of it from first-hand experience. I hope I can one day though! 🙂

 

[tylerbones1313]

There are NO UNKNOWN tongues in the Bible. I already pointed this out. Please note the word "unknown" -- which is NOT in the Greek text -- is in italics and bracketed below:

For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.

For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruit

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.

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.

The KJV translators could have (and should have) translated strictly according to what is in the Greek text. By inserting "unknown" they caused confusion. Let's take verse 2 as an example:
ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ [glosse = tongue] οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ τῶ θεῷ· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει πνεύματι δὲ λαλεῖ μυστήρια·
Literal interlinear: The'[one] speaking in a tongue not to men speaks, but to God; no one for hears; in the Spirit, however, he utters mysteries.

The word "unknown" is used to show that it is "unknown" to the one giving the utterance and majority of the Congregation. Hints the need for and Paul's insistence on an interpretation.

 

[tylerbones1313]

Thank you for posting this! It did strike me as legit and nothing about it disagreed with scripture, interpretation included. The language sounded vaguely familiar but I don't know which one it was (North African is my closest guess). But Paul said that he spoke in the tongues of men AND angels, so I don't think it would HAVE to be a recognized earthly language.

For the record, I have always believed tongues can be used properly in a church service, I just couldn't testify of it from first-hand experience. I hope I can one day though! 🙂

That seems like a bit of a problem, to me anyway. Someone gets up and says something and no one has a clue if it's a know language, an angelic language, or just gibberish. I think that's the problem a lot of people have with tongues.

Just because a group of people follows the "correct" protocol and seem to know what they're doing, that doesn't change the fact they're doing something that could as easily be faked as not. It has to be taken on faith; but a lot of things people put their faith in aren't necessarily on the up-and-up. I've been in church meetings where something very similar happened and it never impressed me as anything extraordinary or miraculous.

That seems like a bit of a problem, to me anyway. Someone gets up and says something and no one has a clue if it's a know language, an angelic language, or just gibberish. I think that's the problem a lot of people have with tongues.

1Cor:1422 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. Both tongues and the interpretation are for a sign to the unbeliever and the Body of Christ. It is God directly communicating with his people. If you experienced a service like that and didn't feel the presence of God as an extraordinary miraculous experience, I question those being used. My opinion only please. God Bless

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

...a problem [ gr 'telios' = completeness ], is in the 'neuter' gender { The Written Word }. Do you believe we should 'place Christ' in that same neuter gender, or should He not
Be In The 'Masculine' gender?

Jesus Christ is the Word robed in flesh if that's what you're asking me.

Precious friend, appreciate your continued kind and humble discussion about
this controversial doctrine Of God.

The point was about "That Which Is Perfect [ telios = 'neuter' ] would
be the "Written Word, Paul Completing Scripture," and thus, "All Three
gifts ceasing", not:

"He {Masculine } Who Is Perfect Is Come".​

Another related question would be: where is the discussion about the
other Two 'gifts' In God's "Trio gift" Passage?:

"Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall​

fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be​

knowledge, it shall vanish away." (1 Corinthians 13:8 AV)​

​

Seems to me the emphasis [ if they are "still active" ] is on the wrong 'gift',
which is at the bottom of God's List (1 Corinthians 12:8-10), and, is Not 'for
all' (1 Corinthians 12:28-30), as some teach, since God Told Paul to rebuke
[ correct ] the carnal Corinthians with:

"Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but​

rather that ye may prophesy." (1 Corinthians 14:1 AV)​

Of course, we all should know by now that every so-called 'prophet' today,
who predict/calculate/speculate/guess about "the dates" of the end times,
have all had a horrible failure rate of 100%.

How then can that 'gift' still be active? Is it not because God's Scriptures Are
Complete, With all we need for our "faith and practice," today, Under Grace?

And, further, as far as I can tell, I have Never "heard anyone claim" they
had the 'gift' of the "word of knowledge" as Peter had in Acts 5:3-4,
have you?:

"But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie​

to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?​

Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold,​

was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing​

in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God..."​

+
God's Judgment?:

​

"...And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost:​

and great fear came on all them that heard these things... his wife...​

Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to​

tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have​

buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. Then​

fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost"​

(Acts 5:5-10 AV)​

Thus, if we are going to "say all these gifts are still active", then should we
not "take all that goes with them," or just ignore all related Scriptures?
How will that "work" out on Judgment Day?

Also, If they are all "still active" as you believe, then are you not
emphasizing and "coveting earnestly the worst gift", When
God Inspired Paul to pen This?:

"But covet earnestly the best gifts:..." (1 Corinthians 12:31 AV)​

​

Thus, it seems to me, that all three of these 'gifts' have ceased, as God
Teaches, From "His Completed Word Of Truth" [ neuter ] 'That' Which Is
Perfect Has Come. Three Ceased, While These Three [ below ], are Very
Clear, Correct?

"...and yet shew I unto you A More Excellent Way." (1 Corinthians 12:31 AV):

"And now abideth faith, hope and charity, these three; but​

The Greatest of these [ is ] charity [love]" (1 Corinthians 13:13 AV)​

Humbly praying for your prayerful and Careful consideration of God's
Important Words Of Truth. Amen.

 

[tylerbones1313]

Precious friend, appreciate your continued kind and humble discussion about
this controversial doctrine Of God.

The point was about "That Which Is Perfect [ telios = 'neuter' ] would
be the "Written Word, Paul Completing Scripture," and thus, "All Three
gifts ceasing", not:

"He {Masculine } Who Is Perfect Is Come".​

Another related question would be: where is the discussion about the
other Two 'gifts' In God's "Trio gift" Passage?:

"Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall​

fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be​

knowledge, it shall vanish away." (1 Corinthians 13:8 AV)​

​

Seems to me the emphasis [ if they are "still active" ] is on the wrong 'gift',
which is at the bottom of God's List (1 Corinthians 12:8-10), and, is Not 'for
all' (1 Corinthians 12:28-30), as some teach, since God Told Paul to rebuke
[ correct ] the carnal Corinthians with:

"Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but​

rather that ye may prophesy." (1 Corinthians 14:1 AV)​

Of course, we all should know by now that every so-called 'prophet' today,
who predict/calculate/speculate/guess about "the dates" of the end times,
have all had a horrible failure rate of 100%.

How then can that 'gift' still be active? Is it not because God's Scriptures Are
Complete, With all we need for our "faith and practice," today, Under Grace?

And, further, as far as I can tell, I have Never "heard anyone claim" they
had the 'gift' of the "word of knowledge" as Peter had in Acts 5:3-4,
have you?:

"But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie​

to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?​

Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold,​

was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing​

in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God..."​

+
God's Judgment?:

​

"...And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost:​

and great fear came on all them that heard these things... his wife...​

Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to​

tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have​

buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. Then​

fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost"​

(Acts 5:5-10 AV)​

Thus, if we are going to "say all these gifts are still active", then should we
not "take all that goes with them," or just ignore all related Scriptures?
How will that "work" out on Judgment Day?

Also, If they are all "still active" as you believe, then are you not
emphasizing and "coveting earnestly the worst gift", When
God Inspired Paul to pen This?:

"But covet earnestly the best gifts:..." (1 Corinthians 12:31 AV)​

​

Thus, it seems to me, that all three of these 'gifts' have ceased, as God
Teaches, From "His Completed Word Of Truth" [ neuter ] 'That' Which Is
Perfect Has Come. Three Ceased, While These Three [ below ], are Very
Clear, Correct?

"...and yet shew I unto you A More Excellent Way." (1 Corinthians 12:31 AV):

"And now abideth faith, hope and charity, these three; but​

The Greatest of these [ is ] charity [love]" (1 Corinthians 13:13 AV)​

Humbly praying for your prayerful and Careful consideration of God's
Important Words Of Truth. Amen.

We will agree to disagree on this we are at an impasse. As long as the Body of Christ is still here on earth, not taken up in the Rapture, the gifts of the spirit are needed as a sign to the unbeliever that every word of God is true, Including hard to believe ones like healing, casting out demons, raising the dead, prophesying, etc.. These are still available if God's people (including myself) would yield to Spirit in total faith. We are too busy with our lives and our stuff, than to focus on the hurting and dying and lost world needing Salvation.

 

[presidente]

To respond to this let me say:
1. You will notice in the King James Bible that the word "unknown" is in italics. Which means that the translators believed they were helping the reader, whereas it has led to a lot of confusion. Had they simply written language or languages all this controversy would not have come about.

I think most or many people on both side of the issue realize that.

2. In Scripture the Greek words are either glossa or glossais. A strict translation would be "language", and as we know from Acts 2 there were about 15 human languages spoken
on the day of Pentecost SUPERNATURALLY.

3. In the 17th century the words "tongue" or "tongues" were also being used commonly for human languages. But today (and in some modern translations) that word should simply be "language".

I think a lot of us know that. But if you use 'language' you miss the linguistics connection to 'tongues of fire.' We also use 'tongues' idiomatically to refer to this spiritual gift.

4. In 1 Corinthians 12-14, all references to "tongues" are to languages. Not "lost languages", since Paul expected a translator to translate what what spoken within the church gatherings.

There is a spiritual gift to be able to translate. Paul told one who speaks in tongues to pray that he may interpret. Apparently the ability could potentially be obtained through prayer.

5. It is obvious that Paul said "tongues of angels" hyperbolically, to make a point. In the Bible you will not find angels speaking in any other languages than actual human languages -- either Hebrew or Aramaic. Greek is the language of the NT, but the people recorded as being spoken to by angels were all Hebrews.

No it is not obvious. This shows up amidst other extreme-but-possible things like giving ones body to be burned or giving all to the poor.

In every single case we see angels talking in the Bible, they are talking to a human or where a human could hear, so there are no cases where they are talking to each other without humans present in scripture, so your argument doesn't prove anything.

6. When Paul says that tongues are for "a sign" to unbelieving Jews, he is quoting Isaiah 28:11,12: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people [Israel]. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. [Notice what is said at the end "Yet they would not hear]. So on the day of Pentecost, when Jews from all over the Roman empire had gathered in Jerusalem, every Jew (and there were probably 20,000) should have repented and been converted after seeing and hearing this "sign'. But only 3,000 souls were saved that day. Why? Because many "would not hear" the Gospel of Christ. Some mocked, and as we know the religious leaders in Jerusalem persecuted the Hebrew Christians.

7. Paul explains the significance of supernaturally spoken languages 1 Cor 14:21,22: In the law [the Tanakh or OT] 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. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. So believers do not need such a sign. They believe on Christ even though they have not seen Him. Neither do Gentiles need this sign.

I don't see how any of that leads up to your final sentence. Tongues are not exclusively for a sign. I Corinthians 14 lists divers tongues among spiritual gifts given for the common good of the body of Christ. Tongues edify the speaker. Interpretation of tongues edify the assembly. And Paul addresses this section to former idol worshippers as we see at the opening of chapter 12. So we are talking about Gentiles also speaking in tongues and being edified by tongues and interpretation.

8. At the same time Paul makes it clear (in I Cor 12-14) that the spiritual gift of "tongues" is for all Christians during the apostolic period. He also insists that there must be an interpreter to interpret what was spoken. Yet he compares tongues to prophesy and states that prophesying is far, far better than tongues.

Those aren't his words. He said he that prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues that the church may be edified, unless he interpret. So a speaker in tongues who interprets just might be as great as one who prophesies.

He who is the greatest is the servant of all, and ministry in gifts is a form of service.

9. Paul went on to say that three of those spiritual gifts described would CEASE or be done away with (1 Cor 13:8-10). They were not to continue indefinitely. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. "That which is perfect" is not stated as "He who is perfect " (Christ). "That which is perfect" also means "that which is complete" and Paul prophetically anticipated a complete Bible.

That interpretation doesn't make any sense. That would mean if you have the Bible, you understand so much better than Paul did when he wrote it that his understanding is like that of a child's in comparison. If you are still learning from Paul's letters things you didn't already know, but he knew, that disproves your theory.

It doesn't fit the context at all. Chapter 1:7 says, 'so that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' The book also goes on to talk in depth about tongues, prophecy, and the coming state of the believer in the resurrection. Chapter 15 also mentions the end, telos.

10, Modern tongues are called "glossolalia" or ecstatic utterances. You will not find that word in the Greek NT, since biblical tongues were not ecstatic utterances. And even pagans were practicing such utterances. "Glossolalia occurred among adherents of various ancient religions, including some of the ancient Greek religions." -- Britannica.

'Ecstatic utterances' is a bad term to use, because not all speakers in tongues are in an ecstasy when they do it and not all people who speak in an ecstasy speak in tongues. Some people like to use academic terms because they think it makes them look smart, or make their writings look smart. 'Glossolalia' is derived from the Greek words translated as 'speaking in tongues' so sometimes it is used in reference to Biblical speaking in tongues, though some academics use it to mean a fake kind of language. I've read 'xenoglossic glossalalia' used to describe real languages spoken 'in tongues.' However, point 10 doesn't offer any real evidence on the matter from a Biblical perspective.

I have also heard the idea that the priestess at Delphi babbled, but a first century witness who was there, Plutarch, defended the oracle's prophesying in plain prose rather than high Greek poetry. Some academic ideas that get repeated are just speculation.

 

[timemeddler]

There are probably a handful of genuine case, but whole congregations? I have my doubts about it's authenticity.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

...We are too busy with our lives and our stuff, than to focus on the hurting and dying and lost world needing Salvation.

Agree, As God Has Said In Scripture, Clearly:

"For I am not ashamed of The Gospel Of Christ: for It is​

The Power of God unto Salvation to every one that believeth;​

to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." (Romans 1:16 AV)​

​

Thus "signs to the Jews" are not "The Power Of God," But The Gospel Is,
Today, Under His Grace!
+
With "faith which worketh by [ The Greatest 'Gift' of ] love", we are to:

"...walk by faith, Not by sight (signs)..." (2 Corinthians 5:7 AV)​

Again, thanks for your kind and humble discussion, as:

We will agree to disagree on this we are at an impasse...

Well spoken, as @Nehemiah6 already pointed out:

Let's just say that there are two camps on this subject and leave it at that.

Amen.

Precious friend, see you in God's Great GloryLand! ♫ 😇 ↑

God's Simple Will!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Paul wrote plainly that knowledge, prophesy, tongues would end when that which is perfect has come. Then he went onto explain how he see's God now dimly but one day will see Him face to face in His perfections. So according to Paul, it's when God reveals Himself in His perfection these 3 will end. That means at the time of "physical death" or at the "Resurrection" we will finally see God in His perfection.

Look at us today. Remove these pictures. Do you know what God physically looks like? None of us do. But we will. This is what Paul spoke about.

 

[tylerbones1313]

Paul uses vivid imagery to describe the limited understanding we have in this life and the complete knowledge awaiting believers in the afterlife.

• "For now we see through a glass, darkly":
  • "Glass" here likely refers to ancient mirrors, which were often made of polished metal and produced dim, distorted reflections.
  • "Darkly" means unclearly or imperfectly.
  • This highlights that our current spiritual understanding is limited and incomplete.
• "But then face to face":
  • This suggests a direct, unimpeded encounter with God, without barriers or obscurity.
• "Now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known":
  • Partial knowledge is contrasted with the perfect knowledge we'll gain in God's presence.
  • To be 'fully known' implies a deep, intimate understanding God has of each individual.

Purpose:

Paul uses this comparison for several reasons:

• Humbling Perspective: Reminds believers their present knowledge is limited; it fosters humility compared to God's omniscience.
• Hope for the Future: Points to a future state of complete understanding and a perfect connection with God. This offers encouragement and hope.
• Focus on Love: By sandwiching this imagery within a discussion on the importance of love, Paul redirects attention away from pride over knowledge. He emphasizes our need to operate with love in this life even amidst imperfect understanding.

Overall:

This verse beautifully captures the idea that our earthly perspective is but a dim reflection of the ultimate reality we will experience when in complete fellowship with God. It encourages us to embrace a combination of humility about our current limitations and hopeful expectation for the future state of full spiritual understanding.

 

[CS1]

I didn't realize how harshly I worded my fist comment here was until I just reread it, and I wish I would have approached it with a little more understanding. I would like to apologize for being unnecessarily offensive and not clear fully because of the way I presented my argument, I honestly didn't feel like I was being rude nor was I writing it in anger or offence, but looking at it again today I see how some may have been offended and misunderstood what I was trying to say.

I do not believe this at all negates that there are some that I think may be lifting up the gift of tongues up WAY too high, I can talk about it better.

Since I came across so harsh that first time I hope this time I word it with more respect so we can honestly discuss it.
Also I read the same bible, so throwing walls of "proof text" at me is not engaging honestly. I know and understand the few verses that would allow for a personal prayer, possibly in an angelic language that we can pray to God in. That was why I specifically said that the first time too. This "angelic language" can even have a place in the church house, if there is someone interpreting it. I believe there is plenty of room for tongues even today, but we have to be careful and not take it too far, nor raise it too high.
Of course if I'm dead wrong on something then please show me where, but let's not try to built soundproof scripture forts around each other.

I do NOT believe the practice of everyone in the church speaking in tongues at the same time without understanding what's being said, is biblical at all. I think speaking tongues in church without it being one or two at a time and interpreted, is unbiblical. What's the point? I am very against the teaching that says you WILL speak in tongues if you're save, that tongues is THE evidence you're saved. I honestly don't think it should even be taught as "proof" you are saved, although I understand where that comes from and there's a lot more nuance I'd want to add to this to clarify what I mean more precisely. Also I'm not accusing anyone here of teaching any of this, I'm just using teachings I have heard about tongues.

Anytime we see tongues happen in the bible we are told exactly what it is, it's believers speaking in languages they'd never learned for the purpose of spreading the Good News. Honestly I couldn't tell you if the miracle took place in the speakers mouth, or in the hearers ear. There is one verse in Acts that makes it seem like when they were speaking that each person heard him in there own tongue, so I don't want to try to act like I know either, I just think it should be approached rationally.

The point I was making about other groups and people speaking in tongues was not that it's ONLY an occultist practice, or that I don't believe God uses it today, or that no believer should do it. I wish I would have made this point better last time, but my point is that BECAUSE it can be counterfeited and copied so easily, we need to be very careful how much importance we put on it, in my opinion.
As a personal thing between you and God, something that brings you closer to Him in truth, how could any believer be against this? That was my point, not at all that everyone that does it is pagan, or that I think it can't be used to move the believer closer to God, I just believe it's our duty to read His word and get to know it well enough to only do these things as He wills and to see through any deceptions that come along.

I hope this one reads a little better and explains what I mean without sounding like I'm calling the whole thing bad.

I did not think you were too harsh, yet I do think you are more opinionated than Biblical on this topic.


"I do NOT believe the practice of everyone in the church speaking in tongues at the same time without understanding what's being said, is biblical at all. "

In the Book of Acts, those who spoke in tongues in chapter two did not know what they were speaking, and they were all speaking at once. That looked very odd because they said they were DRUNK!.

So, spiritual gifts do not gratify the human mind or the flesh. It is foolish to them. Yet God uses it to confound the wise >>> hmmm.

But it opened a door for 3000 to be saved. In One Day. There is corporate worship as there is Corporate tongues. But it is not an act without self-control.

the end use of the gifts of the Holy Spirit must do the following or tell them to shut up and sit down

1. it must edify the body
2. it must line up with the word of God
3. it must bring glory to God and not man
4. people will be saved, healed, or delivered

 

[Blade]

I just want your views backed by Scriptural references on the subject and what it means to you.

For me its not what anyone says. Just read Luke 11 13 and some other verses.. have you received the holy spirit since you believed. Now I read John 3:16 and God kept His word. I read Luke 11:13 and thanked Him because again God kept His word.

As it was asked of me "do you want the holy spirit?" I said yes. They only read the scripture never adding anything as in "what that really means is". No they just believed if GOD said it He will do it. Asked me again I said yes. They prayed one of the shortest prayers I have ever heard and then said "thats it you got it". See we find in life not many have this kind of faith to just believe what HE said knowing He will keep His word. So I got up went to sit down and BAM tongues just came out. Was my life any different? ANYONE that knows Christ as lord can ask HIM if everything I am saying here is 100% fact nothing added or taken away.

So YES I was saved the day before but right then to this very day.. oh but ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

So YES it was like night and day. I know if I had doubted said NOPE Its not for today.. this was 1978-1979 He would have done nothing. He will never go against my our will. So if people here.. I know where I am posting what they believe.

So all I do is.. if GOD said it He will do it. I believe HIM not what man says God really says. Oh not to long ago watched a very nice man of GOD say "that does not happen any more". A here I am and hundreds of thousands more every day every week ever month

 

[Snackersmom]

And, further, as far as I can tell, I have Never "heard anyone claim" they
had the 'gift' of the "word of knowledge" as Peter had in Acts 5:3-4, have you?

Hi Miss Grace! I appreciate your civility in this discussion.

I have had a few words of knowledge. However, they were not regarding lying about property values, and nobody died (thank goodness, I would not have handled that well at all! )

One was about a spiritual situation a friend had battled privately since childhood. They had not told me about the situation at all. The friend was heavy on my mind when I woke up one morning, so I began praying for them and suddenly knowledge popped into my head that was not there before. I suddenly knew about the situation, exactly what it was and what steps the person needed to take to get healing. So I relayed the knowledge to the friend, and they said that it was so accurate it scared them. But they followed through and got healing, and I don't think they have been trouble by it since. Praise God!

The other was a situation at work, it was looking like I might have to fire someone and I REALLY did not want to. So I was praying about it and suddenly I had knowledge about the root causes of the issue, and how to help the person overcome them. So I followed through with what I was told, and the situation improved almost immediately. I was shocked by how well the "prescription" worked, and it even seemed to spill over into other areas of their life as well. The employee eventually moved on to bigger things, but I still catch up with them whenever they are in town. God is so good!

Anyways, sorry to derail the thread, my apologies!