Speaking in tongues

[presidente]

The laying on of hands. Is it a ceremonial law non effect as a shadow or does it move God to perform the will of the one who hands are applied?

According to Hebrew 6, the laying on of hands is among the basic principles of the doctrine of Christ. In the New Testament, we read of it in connection to healing, impartation of spiritual gifts, and ordination and separation to ministry.

 

[cv5]

Here is the verse in question:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

I was on a discussion list in the early days of the Internet with a Greek scholar who had worked as a chair at a university. He pointed out that the word translated 'man' there is 'tis', meaning one, and that one person does not become two or three people when he speaks in tongues. So he took this to one person speaking 'by two, or at the most by three' to refer to something one individual was doing.

Apparently, many Bible translators who are also Greek scholars disagree and translate that verse differently. Maybe they consider his approach to be hyper-literal on the grammatical level. Be that as it may, if we are going to look at it literally like that it says 'in an unknown tongue' and not 'in unknown tongues.' Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are not 'a tongue.' They are many.

His understanding of the passage, in my own words as best I understand it, is that in Greek the word logos can be ommitted by elipses. He took this to mean something like one person speaking two or three utterances in a tongue before someone else interprets.

He also interpreted verse 29 in a similar light. While, grammatically, it could refer to two or three prophets, based on analogy to verse 26, he was inclined to see 'let the prophets speak two or three' to refer to the prophets speaking two or three things... and let the other weigh carefully what is said.

I do not see how the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic interpretation fits with the passage. Seeing the one who interprets as God is totally out of left field. In chapter 12, he presents interpretation of tongues as a manifestation of the Spirit a member of the body of Christ might be given. He asks 'do all interpret.' In I Corinthians 14:5, he writes about the one who speaks in tongues interpreting. In verse 13, he tells the one who speaks in an unknown tongues to pray that he may interpret. Throughout the chapter, the parts on tongues and interpretation lead up to his instructions there in verse 27-28 about speaking in tongues and one interpreting. So it does not make sense to assert that the one who interprets is a member of the congregation throughout the passage, but suddenly refers to God in verse 28.

Incidentally, this is the only really long passage in the New Testament that really goes into detail on how to conduct our meetings. There is no reference to a pastor or one long sermon. 'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. The speaker in tongues and interpreter is specificially allowed to speak. Prophets are allowed to speak. Ye may all prophesy. There is no instruction here to have three hymns followed by one sermon, followed by a prayer, communion, and three hymns. Yet many religious people insist that these elements must be present in that order for there to be a real church service, but actually oppose the operation of the gifts the passage clearly allows. There is also the implication in the passage that the Corinthians did not have the authority to change the God ordained way of meeting that other churches apparently followed, because he asks, what came the word of God out from you or unto you only did it come? And he also calls his instructions commandments of the Lord.

"'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. "

This is the most serious flaw in "Church Services" in this age. Nowadays there is a rigid top down hierarchy enforced where rank and file members are never allowed to speak forth.

In my experience such churches are near to dead, mechanistic reductionist, and fail to exercise the potential of the membership.

Little wonder that I can only endure 3-6 months at any modern day Church. Its little more than a cattle call and collection. Oh...and the modern so called hymns are pathetic to boot. Forced me to leave that last Church. AGoodbye.A dead Church singing dead hymns. Goodbye.

BTW...these are symptoms of the end time falling away IMO. These are indeed the end times as surely as were the days of Noah.

 

[Sketch]

Incidentally, this is the only really long passage in the New Testament that really goes into detail on how to conduct our meetings. There is no reference to a pastor or one long sermon. 'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. The speaker in tongues and interpreter is specificially allowed to speak. Prophets are allowed to speak. Ye may all prophesy. There is no instruction here to have three hymns followed by one sermon, followed by a prayer, communion, and three hymns. Yet many religious people insist that these elements must be present in that order for there to be a real church service, but actually oppose the operation of the gifts the passage clearly allows. There is also the implication in the passage that the Corinthians did not have the authority to change the God ordained way of meeting that other churches apparently followed, because he asks, what came the word of God out from you or unto you only did it come? And he also calls his instructions commandments of the Lord.

Thanks for that post. I want to add a comment to this part. This is something I noticed about the passage that shows another aspect of how different things were back then. Here's the verse, comments below.

1 Corinthians 14:30
And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, we have some who are seated, and some by inference who are standing.
Yet those who are standing are to yield to those who are seated. If someone who is standing in a church gathering is prophesying, they are to stop prophesying if a revelation of prophecy comes to one who is seated. Why?

It would seem that the one seated is being respected above the one standing. As in a leader, or elder.

I take this to mean that the congregation was standing while the leaders were seated.
The opposite of the way we do things today. I'm not saying we should ditch the chairs and pews, just that it was different.

 

[garee]

According to Hebrew 6, the laying on of hands is among the basic principles of the doctrine of Christ. In the New Testament, we read of it in connection to healing, impartation of spiritual gifts, and ordination and separation to ministry.

But what does the shadow represent seeing we are informed God does not heal with human hands in any way shape or form . Do hands mean will and as in we pray His will be done ? I would think we have the privilege to pray. But to connect it to a sign gift men seek after using human hands to make it possible .What happens if the person is not healed?

 

[presidente]

Thanks for that post. I want to add a comment to this part. This is something I noticed about the passage that shows another aspect of how different things were back then. Here's the verse, comments below.

1 Corinthians 14:30
And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, we have some who are seated, and some by inference who are standing.
Yet those who are standing are to yield to those who are seated. If someone who is standing in a church gathering is prophesying, they are to stop prophesying if a revelation of prophecy comes to one who is seated. Why?

It would seem that the one seated is being respected above the one standing. As in a leader, or elder.

I take this to mean that the congregation was standing while the leaders were seated.
The opposite of the way we do things today. I'm not saying we should ditch the chairs and pews, just that it was different.

The passage tells us who was speaking--prophets. It does not say elders. (An elder could also be a prophet, if he us so gifted.)

Looking at the logical flow of the passage, the speaking prophet yielding to one sitting by is what enables "For ye may all prophesy..."

I make that assertion based on the use of 'For' and I take 'ye' in 'ye may all prophesy' to refer to members of the congregation since earlier in the passage Paul paints a picture of all prophesying and someone coming in and declaring God is truly among you after the secrets of the heart are made manifest.

In one passage in Acts, Peter rose to speak.

 

[garee]

Here is the verse in question:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

The word "unknown" was added. Not unknow to the speaker. God does not prophecy in a unknown languages. If not one understanding the language of the speaker . Then God has not interpreted it into other language as he did in Acts 2. Then the person should pray in their heart.

27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

The let it be by two, or at the most by three has do with conversing with each other. Prophecy is a two fold gift . God puts his tongue on one as inspiration and gives the other his understanding according to the words that came from Christ. Both share the gift .As one speaks in his native tongue the stranger hears it in his own native tongue and vice versa.

If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me.So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church.1 Cor.14:11-12

 

[garee]

The passage tells us who was speaking--prophets. It does not say elders. (An elder could also be a prophet, if he us so gifted.)

Looking at the logical flow of the passage, the speaking prophet yielding to one sitting by is what enables "For ye may all prophesy..."

I make that assertion based on the use of 'For' and I take 'ye' in 'ye may all prophesy' to refer to members of the congregation since earlier in the passage Paul paints a picture of all prophesying and someone coming in and declaring God is truly among you after the secrets of the heart are made manifest.

In one passage in Acts, Peter rose to speak.

Are all believers who declare the word of God prophets as apostles (sent ones) as a kingdom of priest sent out with the gospel ?

 

[presidente]

But what does the shadow represent seeing we are informed God does not heal with human hands in any way shape or form .

I am unaware of anywhere in the Bible that says that. Stephen said God does not dwell in temples made with human hands. I notice that a lot of your objections to spiritual gifts come from taking ideas and phrases from scripture and confusing them and using them up in a wrong way. I think you shpukd look up the verses before posting.

The Bible actually says, 'They shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover.' There are a number of examples in the Bible of people being healed after the laying on of hands. Timothy even had a gift in him through the laying on of Paul's hands.

But we believe God heals. Hands alone without God's power will not heal.

But to connect it to a sign gift men seek after using human hands to make it possible

Throughout the Bible, God works through others. He had angels deliver messages and strike the rebellious. He spoke to people through prophets. He uses preachers of the gospel so that through their preaching men might be saved.

The Spirit enables members of the body of Christ to heal, do miracles, prophesy, have wprds of knowledge and words of wisdom and to do many other things. All of these things I can demonstrate from the Bible.

You gave a number of beliefs and ideas about signs that contradict these primciples in scripture.

 

[presidente]

"'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. "

This is the most serious flaw in "Church Services" in this age. Nowadays there is a rigid top down hierarchy enforced where rank and file members are never allowed to speak forth.

In my experience such churches are near to dead, mechanistic reductionist, and fail to exercise the potential of the membership.

Little wonder that I can only endure 3-6 months at any modern day Church. Its little more than a cattle call and collection. Oh...and the modern so called hymns are pathetic to boot. Forced me to leave that last Church. AGoodbye.A dead Church singing dead hymns. Goodbye.

BTW...these are symptoms of the end time falling away IMO. These are indeed the end times as surely as were the days of Noah.

You could go to a house church that believes in having meetings according to I Corinthians 14. But some of these churches are made of people from diverse church backgrounds, so you might encounter a message in tongues and interpretation. So prepared to deal with that.

Some HCs seem kind of Charismatic. I went to one that was made of peopke from mixed backgrounds. When one of them prophesied, the former Wesleyans seemed cool with it.

Before or after the formal part of the meeting a visitor there believed a couple wanted to make a major purchase. They shook their heads no. Another guy tgere told me this guy was a propget and the couple was thinking another couple in the church up on an offer for some land and to build a house. They did that later. But maybe they were fraked out at the word of knowledge or did not make the connection in their minds t the time.

 

[presidente]

Are all believers who declare the word of God prophets as apostles (sent ones) as a kingdom of priest sent out with the gospel ?

Paul asks all are not apiatles, are they? All are not prophets, are they?
I Corinthians 12.

 

[garee]

Paul asks all are not apiatles, are they? All are not prophets, are they?
I Corinthians 12.

I would offer. All who preach the gospel are sent by God, as apostles. .

If they preach another gospel, another Christ, they are false prophets as false apostles.

 

[garee]

I am unaware of anywhere in the Bible that says that. Stephen said God does not dwell in temples made with human hands. I notice that a lot of your objections to spiritual gifts come from taking ideas and phrases from scripture and confusing them and using them up in a wrong way. I think you shpukd look up the verses before posting.

The Bible actually says, 'They shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover.' There are a number of examples in the Bible of people being healed after the laying on of hands. Timothy even had a gift in him through the laying on of Paul's hands.

Thanks for the reply.

They will recover if God puts his hand on them as God's will.

Paul after he said... The Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; in the same context . Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

He does not need human hands to heal.And I am not saying do not use the shadow as a ceremonial law.But how we use it.

God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; Acts 17:24-25

Interestingly the word worship used once in scripture in verse 25 in the Greek is therapón. From where we get the word therapeutic or therapy. We walk by faith as that not seen . The laying on of hands is an appeal to God who heals indiscriminately . Not a sigh gift that many would try and make it, to add to a list. Like being slain in the Spirit falling back drinking poison, out of body experiences e.c.t.

 

[Lanolin]

Some People are just uncomfortable with speaking a tongue they do not know. A lot of people just dont mix with other people who speak another tongue.

Unfortunately. But they will need to get over this one day.

In Heaven we will all be praisng the Lord in every tongue God has given us.

 

[Sketch]

The passage tells us who was speaking--prophets. It does not say elders. (An elder could also be a prophet, if he us so gifted.)

Looking at the logical flow of the passage, the speaking prophet yielding to one sitting by is what enables "For ye may all prophesy..."

I make that assertion based on the use of 'For' and I take 'ye' in 'ye may all prophesy' to refer to members of the congregation since earlier in the passage Paul paints a picture of all prophesying and someone coming in and declaring God is truly among you after the secrets of the heart are made manifest.

In one passage in Acts, Peter rose to speak.

I think there was a platform in the front, as we have today.
And someone might stand on the platform to read or preach.

 

[cv5]

Some People are just uncomfortable with speaking a tongue they do not know. A lot of people just dont mix with other people who speak another tongue.

Unfortunately. But they will need to get over this one day.

In Heaven we will all be praisng the Lord in every tongue God has given us.

Not at all. I would never be anything less than basking in the Glory of the Lord witnessing legitimate tongues and interpretation. What I see masquerading as tongues leaves me with a reaction of revulsion. Both reactions being antipodes on the emotional great circle of course.

 

[KJV1611]

Here is the verse in question:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

I was on a discussion list in the early days of the Internet with a Greek scholar who had worked as a chair at a university. He pointed out that the word translated 'man' there is 'tis', meaning one, and that one person does not become two or three people when he speaks in tongues. So he took this to one person speaking 'by two, or at the most by three' to refer to something one individual was doing.

I agree with what the Greek scholar said here. It's one person speaking by "two, or at the most by three".

Apparently, many Bible translators who are also Greek scholars disagree and translate that verse differently. Maybe they consider his approach to be hyper-literal on the grammatical level. Be that as it may, if we are going to look at it literally like that it says 'in an unknown tongue' and not 'in unknown tongues.' Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are not 'a tongue.' They are many.

Yes I agree there are many many unknown tongues, but I think Paul is saying that if any man does speak in any unknown tongue then that SINGULAR unknown tongue is limited to two or at the most three unknown tongues.

His understanding of the passage, in my own words as best I understand it, is that in Greek the word logos can be ommitted by elipses. He took this to mean something like one person speaking two or three utterances in a tongue before someone else interprets.

If I were to say" if any man speak in a foreign language, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course". Would you interpret that to mean that the man can make 2 or 3 utterances in one foreign language or would you think that I meant that the man can only use 2 or 3 different languages when he's speaking in a foreign language?

I see your point and his, but I disagree with that one.

He also interpreted verse 29 in a similar light. While, grammatically, it could refer to two or three prophets, based on analogy to verse 26, he was inclined to see 'let the prophets speak two or three' to refer to the prophets speaking two or three things... and let the other weigh carefully what is said.
I see verse 29 the same as 26 because all truth is established out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses. Each language, the Hebrew, the Greek and the Aramiac are the three witnesses that establish the truth of the scripture. The words coming out of the mouths of two or three prophets establish the truth of their prophecies.

I do not see how the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic interpretation fits with the passage. Seeing the one who interprets as God is totally out of left field. In chapter 12, he presents interpretation of tongues as a manifestation of the Spirit a member of the body of Christ might be given. He asks 'do all interpret.' In I Corinthians 14:5, he writes about the one who speaks in tongues interpreting. In verse 13, he tells the one who speaks in an unknown tongues to pray that he may interpret. Throughout the chapter, the parts on tongues and interpretation lead up to his instructions there in verse 27-28 about speaking in tongues and one interpreting. So it does not make sense to assert that the one who interprets is a member of the congregation throughout the passage, but suddenly refers to God in verse 28.

Incidentally, this is the only really long passage in the New Testament that really goes into detail on how to conduct our meetings. There is no reference to a pastor or one long sermon. 'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. The speaker in tongues and interpreter is specificially allowed to speak. Prophets are allowed to speak. Ye may all prophesy. There is no instruction here to have three hymns followed by one sermon, followed by a prayer, communion, and three hymns. Yet many religious people insist that these elements must be present in that order for there to be a real church service, but actually oppose the operation of the gifts the passage clearly allows. There is also the implication in the passage that the Corinthians did not have the authority to change the God ordained way of meeting that other churches apparently followed, because he asks, what came the word of God out from you or unto you only did it come? And he also calls his instructions commandments of the Lord.

I have to do a few things today so I'll have to come back latter for the rest.

 

[RickyZ]

You've got to be kidding... this is the guy who says Christians can take the mark of the beast during the tribulation and still get saved. Do you believe that too?

Depends ... do you believe in osas?

 

[RickyZ]

In Heaven we will all be praisng the Lord in every tongue God has given us.

I think it's actually our native language. When man and woman were created, and as their numbers grew, they had a singular spiritual language. Mankind lost that singular language at Babel. When Christ returns to restore creation, thereby bringing back the perfection of creation, that singular language will be restored. Tongues is our ability to tap into that future-restored language now via the Holy Spirit.

 

[presidente]

I think there was a platform in the front, as we have today.
And someone might stand on the platform to read or preach.

If they met in people's homes, why would they have had a platform?

 

[Lanolin]

I think it's actually our native language. When man and woman were created, and as their numbers grew, they had a singular spiritual language. Mankind lost that singular language at Babel. When Christ returns to restore creation, thereby bringing back the perfection of creation, that singular language will be restored. Tongues is our ability to tap into that future-restored language now via the Holy Spirit.

I find some of the words like Hallelujah are actually Hebrew.
The nation of Israel actually speak in Hebrew. When they were in exile they had to learn the tongues of their host countries when they were taken in captivity. But they never lost their native tongue and now they can speak it again.

When Moses was taken in by the Pharoah and raised egyptian he spoke egyptian...but actually he could understand hebrew. If people ask me how can I speak english when I look chinese its because I grew up with it, you just start speaking. I didnt have to study it or learn it. Its funny how tongues work and how you can speaking fluently in a language you had never heard before. Imagine what it was like in the tower of Babel when God confused the languages, and they just couldnt understand each other well now its reversed. When we speak in tongues we are magnifying God. Its not like we are saying our shopping list or wheres the toilet or anything like that. Lol