WHAT In The World Is . . .

Originally Posted by RadLad72

If it doesn't agree with Scripture, it is not from God. Can we all at least agree on that?

Therefore, the 'tongue-speaking' seen in any number of 'charismatic' churches must be seen as not from God as it is not scriptural. As Trek said, I was calling a spade a spade. The truth is like a double0edged sword that cuts through muscle and bone and marrow. If you choose to take what I have said as blaspheming the Holy Spirit, then you are seeing things wrong, not me saying things wrong.

Remember, Paul was NOT endorsing what the Corinthian people were doing. He was telling them off!

I was not meaning to offend people, I was, however, meaning to bring into the light what they are doing as false. As is proven time and again by Scripture (there are plenty of scripture texts to back me up, but I am sure they have all been covered before and as a result I won't post them again ).

God bless,

Rad.

1) no. don´t agree.

2) wrong. he agreed with the gifts being in operation, he called them to an orderly fashion in their public use. he said he wished all spoke in tongues. he said he spoke more in tongues than all of them. and he told them not to quench the Spirit.

lastly) my own testimony and those of other credit-worthy born-again believers says your understanding of the Scriptures is incorrect.

now. that you don´t speak in tongues and don´t desire to as you see them as non-scriptural is perfectly fine.
but to call those of us who do deceived at best and deceivers or liars at worst, that is hefty.

[RadLad72]

Originally Posted by Christa

1) no. don´t agree.

2) wrong. he agreed with the gifts being in operation, he called them to an orderly fashion in their public use. he said he wished all spoke in tongues. he said he spoke more in tongues than all of them. and he told them not to quench the Spirit.

lastly) my own testimony and those of other credit-worthy born-again believers says your understanding of the Scriptures is incorrect.

now. that you don´t speak in tongues and don´t desire to as you see them as non-scriptural is perfectly fine.
but to call those of us who do deceived at best and deceivers or liars at worst, that is hefty.

Does anyone even realise that tongues were not given to people to babble on in church? They were given to spread the Gospel to unbelievers. In fact, Paul says that they were for the unbeliever, not believers. Therefore, the stuff that goes on in Charismatic churches is not what they were given it for.

Why does Paul say that he is glad to speak more tongues (read 'languages') than all the Corinthians? He was an Apostle. He was spreading the good news of Jesus to unreached people groups of the time, including those who spoke different languages to him. Of course he would have been given the gift more abundantly than those not doing this particular job.

The church at Corinth was one in turmoil. They were in a large port city that had a multitude of different nationalities and relious backgrounds (including Pagan) and people were incoporporating these non-religious activities into the religious service in church which Paul was telling them not to. Please take your blinkers off and see this for what it is. Paul is NOT endorsing the babble that goes on. He is telling them that they shouldn't be doing it the way they were, which was as the Pagans were at the time.

You know what? I believe I am saved and the only other language I can speak is a very small amount of German. The idea that you must speak in tongues as a result of being saved is also a lot of nonsense. Not Scriptural at all.

Please don't tell me that I am calling anyone a liar as I am not. I am presenting information on a particular topic that is obviously a touchy one. It is one that needs touching on and clearing up (though I do not know if that last bit is possible).

BTW, just FYI - the word translated as tongues is the Greek word G.l.o.s.s.a which actually means languages (not ecstatic utterances as some people would have you believe).

I am not going out of my way to offend anyone (unlike some people on the thread) but I believe I need to call a spade a spade on this topic.

Rad.

[Enterprise]

I am wondering, do the tounge speakers here, suggest that only those that speak in tounges have been saved? Thus the rest are doomed. Sounds like Trekkers 'few', (Are you among the few, who are the few?) has gotten a lot fewer.

[Trekker06]

Originally Posted by Enterprise

I am wondering, do the tounge speakers here, suggest that only those that speak in tounges have been saved? Thus the rest are doomed. Sounds like Trekkers 'few', (Are you among the few, who are the few?) has gotten a lot fewer.

Hmmm . . .very good, Ent.

Actually, you raise a VERY important point that is usually all but ignored. We are told that, in order to be saved, one needs to be 'Spirit-filled'. We're also told by the same group (usually the Pentecostals) that one's BEING 'Spirit-filled' is evidenced by one's 'speaking in tongues'. It seems to me that we can't have it both ways so your question, Ent, deserves an answer from those of the Pentecostal persuasion. Am I correct with the following equations:

'Tongues' = evidence of being 'Spirit-filled' = salvation . . .?

No 'tongues' = not 'Spirit-filled' = lost . . .?

Would someone care to respond?

[Trekker06]

Originally Posted by RadLad72

Does anyone even realise that tongues were not given to people to babble on in church? They were given to spread the Gospel to unbelievers. In fact, Paul says that they were for the unbeliever, not believers. Therefore, the stuff that goes on in Charismatic churches is not what they were given it for.

Those who claim to 'speak in tongues' are less interested in the scriptural facts and MORE interested in the personal experience. It really IS a case of 'if it feels good, do it, despite all else.' This so-called personal experience is JUST that ...it is not a selfless act that benefits others. I have yet to see the actual CHURCH (others) being edified by someone's speaking 'gibberish'.

Note: Jeff, as long as someone is making sounds that make no sense to themselves or to anyone else it IS referred to as 'gibberish'. It is not necessary a derogative word but simply a word to describe unrecognizable sounds.

Originally Posted by RadLad72

Why does Paul say that he is glad to speak more tongues (read 'languages') than all the Corinthians? He was an Apostle. He was spreading the good news of Jesus to unreached people groups of the time, including those who spoke different languages to him. Of course he would have been given the gift more abundantly than those not doing this particular job.

And in the process, of course, the Jews (unbelievers) were also given the 'sign'. This is just opinion but I don't believe for a moment that Paul's ability of being able to speak several languages was just 'zapped' on to him by the Holy Spirit. Paul NEVER even implies this. He simply says that he speaks more languages than anyone else. People just ASSUME he means something else. It may have taken Paul many years to acquire multilingual skills ...in fact, it probably DID. This does not mean that these abilities were not 'gifts' from God. Many of us are gifted in some way and these gifts didn't occur overnight. We can still attribute them to God as long as we use those gifts to edify others ...AND NOT OURSELVES. These gifts THEN become 'gifts of the Spirit'.

Originally Posted by RadLad72

The church at Corinth was one in turmoil. They were in a large port city that had a multitude of different nationalities and relious backgrounds (including Pagan) and people were incoporporating these non-religious activities into the religious service in church which Paul was telling them not to. Please take your blinkers off and see this for what it is. Paul is NOT endorsing the babble that goes on. He is telling them that they shouldn't be doing it the way they were, which was as the Pagans were at the time.

I absolutely agree because I have read the history of the Church of Corinth and the facts and the words of Paul tie in very nicely. Still and all, those who LOVE the experience will not listen to the facts. The euphoria - the spiritual-high - connected to the experience is evidently very powerful. THIS kind of experience is NEVER even alluded to by Paul. It is psychological in nature.

Originally Posted by RadLad72

You know what? I believe I am saved and the only other language I can speak is a very small amount of German. The idea that you must speak in tongues as a result of being saved is also a lot of nonsense. Not Scriptural at all.

Well, I put forward a question pertaining to 'must one speak in tongues in order to be saved?' in my previous post. I will be most interested in the responses.

Originally Posted by RadLad72

Please don't tell me that I am calling anyone a liar as I am not. I am presenting information on a particular topic that is obviously a touchy one. It is one that needs touching on and clearing up (though I do not know if that last bit is possible).

Even those who came out of the practice of 'speaking in tongues' (our pastor's wife, for example) say how difficult it is to forsake THE EXPERIENCE. They have symptoms of 'withdrawal'. I won't equate other issues on this thread that are similar in nature.

Originally Posted by RadLad72

BTW, just FYI - the word translated as tongues is the Greek word G.l.o.s.s.a which actually means languages (not ecstatic utterances as some people would have you believe).

Absolutely. Anyone with a Greek Concordance/Lexicon can look up the word 'tongues' for themselves. NOWHERE in the entire New Testament (or Old Testament for that matter) is the word anything but 'g.l.o.s.s.a'. NOWHERE does it define the word 'g.l.o.s.s.a' as 'ecstatic speech'.

[Trekker06]

Originally Posted by RadLad72

If it doesn't agree with Scripture, it is not from God. Can we all at least agree on that?

Therefore, the 'tongue-speaking' seen in any number of 'charismatic' churches must be seen as not from God as it is not scriptural. As Trek said, I was calling a spade a spade. The truth is like a double0edged sword that cuts through muscle and bone and marrow. If you choose to take what I have said as blaspheming the Holy Spirit, then you are seeing things wrong, not me saying things wrong.

Remember, Paul was NOT endorsing what the Corinthian people were doing. He was telling them off!

I was not meaning to offend people, I was, however, meaning to bring into the light what they are doing as false. As is proven time and again by Scripture (there are plenty of scripture texts to back me up, but I am sure they have all been covered before and as a result I won't post them again ).

Originally Posted by Christa

1) no. don´t agree.

You disagree with the statement 'if it doesn't agree with scripture it is not from God'? Is that what you don't agree with? If so, please explain.

Originally Posted by Christa

2) wrong. he agreed with the gifts being in operation, he called them to an orderly fashion in their public use. he said he wished all spoke in tongues. he said he spoke more in tongues than all of them. and he told them not to quench the Spirit.

Paul is clearly admonishing certain 'someones' in the church for misusing their abilities to communicate the Word of God ...whatever that might be . . . Again, these abilities - the way I see the issue - were nothing to do with those of Pentecost. These 'gifts' were abilities that individuals ALREADY possessed BEFORE they set foot in the church. Many of those who resided in Corinth had lingual skills due to their either being transients, traders, or those connected with and being reliant on foreign trade and traders. Why is 'everybody' assuming that these 'gifts' were suddenly thrust upon these people by the Holy Spirit?

All of the gifts mentioned by Paul involve 'time and experience'. No one becomes a 'teacher of scripture' in an instant. No one gains 'wisdom' and 'knowledge' in an instant. No one becomes a 'healer' (doctor) in an instant. No one speaks another language in an instant. * But ...these abilities when used for the correct purpose (as per Paul's message) ARE gifts of the Spirit. There is NO MENTION of these gifts being given in an instant. Even if they had been given in an instant, the Holy Spirit would surely have been more discerning than to give them to people who would abuse them!

Originally Posted by Christa

lastly) my own testimony and those of other credit-worthy born-again believers says your understanding of the Scriptures is incorrect.

now. that you don´t speak in tongues and don´t desire to as you see them as non-scriptural is perfectly fine.
but to call those of us who do deceived at best and deceivers or liars at worst, that is hefty.

It is no less 'hefty' than when Jeff persistently refers to me as being un-Christian (not 'born again') or/and 'lacking in the Spirit'. In this case you feel that YOU are on the receiving end.

* I am not referring to Pentecost at all here but the Church of Corinth. At Pentecost I'm unsure as to whether the Apostles actually 'spoke' a different language or as to whether foreigners 'heard' them in their own language. In any event, these languages mentioned in whatever context are REAL (as in 'foreign') languages.

LOL, you must speak in tongues to be saved!!!! Just where did you get that from?????? I am too tired right now to answer the rest, but you did give me laugh (not in the Spirit though!)

[SeekerSA]

Originally Posted by Trekker06

--snip-- Ent, deserves an answer from those of the Pentecostal persuasion. Am I correct with the following equations:

'Tongues' = evidence of being 'Spirit-filled' = salvation . . .? (No)

No 'tongues' = not 'Spirit-filled' = lost . . .? (No)

Would someone care to respond?

Hopefully you will read it this time

The most common proof text given by Pentecostals is (Using ALT purely for the extended text)

1Co 14:2 For the one speaking in a tongue does not speak to people _but_ to God, for no one understands [him], but in [his] spirit [or, by [the] Spirit] he speaks secrets [or, mysteries].


This is essentially the private tongue.

The whole of 1 Cor 14 should be read in its entirety. Many believe tongues was only for the early church and specifically to converse in a known language. While this is true in part, one must assume that in the time of Pentecost, there must have been a common language, suggested by some as Aramaic. Foreigners there would have had their own language but would have spoken in the language commonly used at the time. In Acts it clearly states that people heard these people speaking in their own tongue.

Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And dwelling at Jerusalem there were Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 But this sound occurring, the multitude came together and were confounded, because they each heard them speaking in his own dialect.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not these who speak all Galileans?

This false teaching has come through traditional churches through the ages as has many false doctrines come in through the ages (but we will not go into that here)

1Co 14:3 But the one prophesying to people speaks edification and exhortation [or, encouragement] and comfort.
1Co 14:4 The one speaking in a tongue edifies himself, but the one prophesying edifies [the] assembly.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you* all to be speaking with tongues, but more that you* shall be prophesying. For the one prophesying [is] greater than the one speaking with tongues, unless he interprets [or, translates], so that the assembly receives edification.
1Co 14:6 But now, brothers [and sisters], if I come to you* speaking with tongues, what will I benefit you*, unless I speak to you* either with a revelation or with knowledge or with prophesy or with teaching?

This part deals with comparison of prophesy verses tongues. Now this can be taken two ways. Prophesy need not necessarily be in a tongue or it can be in a tongue. If in a tongue it needs to be interpreted.

Speaking from the Spirit, prophesying, in verse 5 clearly indicates that if said in a known language of the church, is more beneficial to the assembly than a tongue which no one understands. It is followed by a however. If a tongue is brought, prophesy in unknown language, and is then translated, either by the one bringing the tongue or by another then the tongue edifies. This is further emphasised in verse 6.

1Co 14:7 Likewise, the lifeless [things] give a sound, whether flute or harp. If it is not giving a difference in the sounds, how will the [music] played on a flute or the [music] played on a harp be known [or, distinguished]?
1Co 14:8 For if a trumpet also gives an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1Co 14:9 In the same way, you* also, if you* do not give intelligible speech by means of the tongue, how will the [thing] spoken be known? For you* will be speaking into air.
1Co 14:10 [There] are, it may be [fig., perhaps], so many kinds of sounds in the world, and none of them without meaning.
1Co 14:11 So if I do not know the power [fig., meaning] of the sound, I will be to the one speaking [as] a foreigner, and the one speaking [will be] to me [as] a foreigner.
1Co 14:12 In the same way, _you*_ also, since you* are zealous of spiritual [gifts], for the building up [or, edification] of the assembly, be seeking so that you* shall be abounding.
1Co 14:13 For this very reason, the one speaking in a tongue, let him be praying that he shall be interpreting [or, translating].
1Co 14:14 For if I am praying in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind [or, understanding] is unfruitful.
1Co 14:15 What then is it? I will pray with the spirit, but I will also pray with the mind [or, understanding]; I will sing praises with the spirit, but I will also sing praises with the mind [or, understanding].
1Co 14:16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will the one occupying the place of the unlearned say the "So be it!" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know [or, understand] what you are saying?
1Co 14:17 For _you_ indeed are rightly giving thanks, _but_ the other is not built up [or, edified]!


This part goes on to deal with tongues having their place but if merely babbled in assembly without interpretation, does not edifies the body. This is exactly why Paul addresses the issue here. I know many churches, members pray in tongues loudly, and in cases try outdo each other in volume yet they are speaking in a private tongue and this whole practice is [sarcasm] "very religious" [/sarcasm] This is why many people discredit tongues as being authentic.

Paul is trying here to teach correct discipline in the utilisation of the gift of tongues.

There have been many reported cases where a tongue was brought, no interpretation was necessary as someone in the assembly understands it as their mother tongue. One foreign preacher to the US could not speak English and prayed for an interpreter, none came and under the anointing delivered his whole sermon in tongues, English.

Admonition continues below.

1Co 14:18 I give thanks to my God [that] I speak in tongues more than all of you*.
1Co 14:19 _But_ in an assembly I desire to speak five words by means of my understanding, so that I shall also instruct others, rather than countless [or, ten thousand] words in a tongue.
1Co 14:20 Brothers [and sisters], stop being young children in your* understanding, _but_ continue being as a child in evil, but continue becoming perfect [or, complete] in your* understanding.
1Co 14:21 In the Law it has been written, "By ones speaking different tongues and by different lips [fig., speech] I will speak to this people, and not even in this manner will they hear Me," says the Lord. [Isaiah 28:11,12; Deut 28:49]

This verse (21) gives reference to the prophecy from the OT.

1Co 14:22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to the ones believing _but_ to the unbelieving ones, but prophesy [is] not for the unbelieving ones _but_ for the ones believing.

A very important verse here. Tongues is a sign to UNBELIEVERS.

1Co 14:23 Therefore, if the whole assembly comes together to the same [place] and all are speaking in tongues, and unlearned [ones] or unbelievers comes in, they will say that you* are raving mad, will they not?
1Co 14:24 But if all are prophesying, and someone comes in, an unbeliever or an unlearned [one], he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all.
1Co 14:25 And in this way, the secrets of his heart [fig., inner self] become revealed, and in this way, having fallen on [his] face, he will prostrate himself in worship before God, declaring [or, acknowledging] that God truly is among you*.

Here (above) we see the importance of prophesy over private tongues.

1Co 14:26 What then is it, brothers [and sisters]? Whenever you* shall be coming together, each [one] of you* has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation [or, a translation]. Be letting all [things] be for building up [or, edification].
1Co 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, [let it be] by two or [at] the most by three, and [each] in turn, and let one be interpreting [or, translating].
1Co 14:28 But if [there] is not an interpreter [or, translator], let him keep silent in an assembly, but let him speak to himself and to God.
1Co 14:29 Now let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
1Co 14:30 But if [something] is revealed to another sitting [there], let the first keep silent.
1Co 14:31 For you* are able, one by one, all to be prophesying, so that all shall be learning, and all shall be continually encouraged.
1Co 14:32 And [the] spiritual [gifts; or, spirits] of prophets are subject to prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not of disorder _but_ of peace, as in all the assemblies of the holy ones.

This part above deals with the correct way tongues and gifts are to be applied in an assembly, particularly that tongues and/or prophesy is subject to the believer, it is not something that happens randomly.

What discredits tongues in many churches is it is incorrectly taught. I have heard babbling literally where any linguist can pick up that there is no cogniant speech pattern viz.

Baba balaba baba balaba baba baba baba

It is amazing how many profess to have tongues have only this gibberish. Instead of elders shutting these people up and/or laying hands on them so that they can receive the gift of tongues, they are left to make a mockery of a gift they do not possess.

At times some have a prophetic anointing and feel the word to be given sounds more holy if first brought in a tongue. What I have noticed, people that do this may not even have the prophetic gift but merely have received a revelation in the previous week and bring this falsely as a tongue + interpretation.

Why do I say this? Well in all cases, I never witnessed to that which they said as being of God. God may admonish an assembly but it always has a positive note to end on.

In all these cases, having the gift of interpretation, nada. Even when the Holy Spirit gives interpretation to an individual, it is not always released through that individual. God is not an author of confusion and will have more than one witness.

I have only seen it three times when someone stood up and stated the interpretation was wrong. Prophesy must line up with the word of God. Many 2nd witnesses come from scripture. What happens, the Lord lays a revelation on someone's heart through scripture but that person is disobedient to share, then a prophesy and interpretation and then that person is compelled to share.

Another problem is that tongues becomes tradition. If a service does not have at least one tongue and interpretation, "Oh the Lord was not here today.." Ridiculous! But it happens.

When you put God in a box, to admonish you, He will show you His Awesomeness in using the most simplest thing to bring His will, small children. In a church I attended, where there was no exclusion of children from the main worship service, often children would come forward and share something that would have the entire congregation in tears.

Of all the gifts, tongues and interpretation are number eight & nine on the list.

1. Word of wisdom
2. Word of knowledge
3. Faith
4. Healings
5. Divine workings of miraculous works
6. Prophecy
7. Discernment of spirits
8. Different tongues
9. Interpretation of tongues

1Co 12:8 For to one has been given a (1)word of wisdom by the Spirit, but to another a (2)word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
1Co 12:9 but to a different [one] (3)faith by the same Spirit, but to another spiritual gifts of (4)healings by the same Spirit,
1Co 12:10 but to another (5)divine workings of miraculous works, but to another (6)prophecy, but to another (7)discernment of spirits, but to a (8)different [one] [various] kinds of tongues [fig., languages, and throughout epistle], but to another (9)interpretation [or, translation] of tongues.
1Co 12:11 But the one and the same Spirit supernaturally works all these [things], distributing to each just as He intends.

In closing, God is unchangeable so to assume that tongues are not relevant for today is a faulty conclusion. Tongues are not the only sign of baptism in the Holy Spirit, that is wrong teaching.

I guess why most do not challenge babblings is

1. Fear of bringing offence
2. Fear of Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit aka unpardonable sin

So a long answer in context of scripture. I was not even attending a tongue practicing church when I received my tongue and it was at work in the daytime.



Trek

You still owe us and explananion on the SDA SoF under general topics.

Originally Posted by SeekerSA

Hopefully you will read it this time

The most common proof text given by Pentecostals is (Using ALT purely for the extended text)

1Co 14:2 For the one speaking in a tongue does not speak to people _but_ to God, for no one understands [him], but in [his] spirit [or, by [the] Spirit] he speaks secrets [or, mysteries].


This is essentially the private tongue.

The whole of 1 Cor 14 should be read in its entirety. Many believe tongues was only for the early church and specifically to converse in a known language. While this is true in part, one must assume that in the time of Pentecost, there must have been a common language, suggested by some as Aramaic. Foreigners there would have had their own language but would have spoken in the language commonly used at the time. In Acts it clearly states that people heard these people speaking in their own tongue.

Act 2:4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Act 2:5 And dwelling at Jerusalem there were Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 But this sound occurring, the multitude came together and were confounded, because they each heard them speaking in his own dialect.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not these who speak all Galileans?

This false teaching has come through traditional churches through the ages as has many false doctrines come in through the ages (but we will not go into that here)

1Co 14:3 But the one prophesying to people speaks edification and exhortation [or, encouragement] and comfort.
1Co 14:4 The one speaking in a tongue edifies himself, but the one prophesying edifies [the] assembly.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you* all to be speaking with tongues, but more that you* shall be prophesying. For the one prophesying [is] greater than the one speaking with tongues, unless he interprets [or, translates], so that the assembly receives edification.
1Co 14:6 But now, brothers [and sisters], if I come to you* speaking with tongues, what will I benefit you*, unless I speak to you* either with a revelation or with knowledge or with prophesy or with teaching?

This part deals with comparison of prophesy verses tongues. Now this can be taken two ways. Prophesy need not necessarily be in a tongue or it can be in a tongue. If in a tongue it needs to be interpreted.

Speaking from the Spirit, prophesying, in verse 5 clearly indicates that if said in a known language of the church, is more beneficial to the assembly than a tongue which no one understands. It is followed by a however. If a tongue is brought, prophesy in unknown language, and is then translated, either by the one bringing the tongue or by another then the tongue edifies. This is further emphasised in verse 6.

1Co 14:7 Likewise, the lifeless [things] give a sound, whether flute or harp. If it is not giving a difference in the sounds, how will the [music] played on a flute or the [music] played on a harp be known [or, distinguished]?
1Co 14:8 For if a trumpet also gives an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1Co 14:9 In the same way, you* also, if you* do not give intelligible speech by means of the tongue, how will the [thing] spoken be known? For you* will be speaking into air.
1Co 14:10 [There] are, it may be [fig., perhaps], so many kinds of sounds in the world, and none of them without meaning.
1Co 14:11 So if I do not know the power [fig., meaning] of the sound, I will be to the one speaking [as] a foreigner, and the one speaking [will be] to me [as] a foreigner.
1Co 14:12 In the same way, _you*_ also, since you* are zealous of spiritual [gifts], for the building up [or, edification] of the assembly, be seeking so that you* shall be abounding.
1Co 14:13 For this very reason, the one speaking in a tongue, let him be praying that he shall be interpreting [or, translating].
1Co 14:14 For if I am praying in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind [or, understanding] is unfruitful.
1Co 14:15 What then is it? I will pray with the spirit, but I will also pray with the mind [or, understanding]; I will sing praises with the spirit, but I will also sing praises with the mind [or, understanding].
1Co 14:16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will the one occupying the place of the unlearned say the "So be it!" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know [or, understand] what you are saying?
1Co 14:17 For _you_ indeed are rightly giving thanks, _but_ the other is not built up [or, edified]!


This part goes on to deal with tongues having their place but if merely babbled in assembly without interpretation, does not edifies the body. This is exactly why Paul addresses the issue here. I know many churches, members pray in tongues loudly, and in cases try outdo each other in volume yet they are speaking in a private tongue and this whole practice is [sarcasm] "very religious" [/sarcasm] This is why many people discredit tongues as being authentic.

Paul is trying here to teach correct discipline in the utilisation of the gift of tongues.

There have been many reported cases where a tongue was brought, no interpretation was necessary as someone in the assembly understands it as their mother tongue. One foreign preacher to the US could not speak English and prayed for an interpreter, none came and under the anointing delivered his whole sermon in tongues, English.

Admonition continues below.

1Co 14:18 I give thanks to my God [that] I speak in tongues more than all of you*.
1Co 14:19 _But_ in an assembly I desire to speak five words by means of my understanding, so that I shall also instruct others, rather than countless [or, ten thousand] words in a tongue.
1Co 14:20 Brothers [and sisters], stop being young children in your* understanding, _but_ continue being as a child in evil, but continue becoming perfect [or, complete] in your* understanding.
1Co 14:21 In the Law it has been written, "By ones speaking different tongues and by different lips [fig., speech] I will speak to this people, and not even in this manner will they hear Me," says the Lord. [Isaiah 28:11,12; Deut 28:49]

This verse (21) gives reference to the prophecy from the OT.

1Co 14:22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to the ones believing _but_ to the unbelieving ones, but prophesy [is] not for the unbelieving ones _but_ for the ones believing.

A very important verse here. Tongues is a sign to UNBELIEVERS.

1Co 14:23 Therefore, if the whole assembly comes together to the same [place] and all are speaking in tongues, and unlearned [ones] or unbelievers comes in, they will say that you* are raving mad, will they not?
1Co 14:24 But if all are prophesying, and someone comes in, an unbeliever or an unlearned [one], he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all.
1Co 14:25 And in this way, the secrets of his heart [fig., inner self] become revealed, and in this way, having fallen on [his] face, he will prostrate himself in worship before God, declaring [or, acknowledging] that God truly is among you*.

Here (above) we see the importance of prophesy over private tongues.

1Co 14:26 What then is it, brothers [and sisters]? Whenever you* shall be coming together, each [one] of you* has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation [or, a translation]. Be letting all [things] be for building up [or, edification].
1Co 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, [let it be] by two or [at] the most by three, and [each] in turn, and let one be interpreting [or, translating].
1Co 14:28 But if [there] is not an interpreter [or, translator], let him keep silent in an assembly, but let him speak to himself and to God.
1Co 14:29 Now let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
1Co 14:30 But if [something] is revealed to another sitting [there], let the first keep silent.
1Co 14:31 For you* are able, one by one, all to be prophesying, so that all shall be learning, and all shall be continually encouraged.
1Co 14:32 And [the] spiritual [gifts; or, spirits] of prophets are subject to prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not of disorder _but_ of peace, as in all the assemblies of the holy ones.

This part above deals with the correct way tongues and gifts are to be applied in an assembly, particularly that tongues and/or prophesy is subject to the believer, it is not something that happens randomly.

What discredits tongues in many churches is it is incorrectly taught. I have heard babbling literally where any linguist can pick up that there is no cogniant speech pattern viz.

Baba balaba baba balaba baba baba baba

It is amazing how many profess to have tongues have only this gibberish. Instead of elders shutting these people up and/or laying hands on them so that they can receive the gift of tongues, they are left to make a mockery of a gift they do not possess.

At times some have a prophetic anointing and feel the word to be given sounds more holy if first brought in a tongue. What I have noticed, people that do this may not even have the prophetic gift but merely have received a revelation in the previous week and bring this falsely as a tongue + interpretation.

Why do I say this? Well in all cases, I never witnessed to that which they said as being of God. God may admonish an assembly but it always has a positive note to end on.

In all these cases, having the gift of interpretation, nada. Even when the Holy Spirit gives interpretation to an individual, it is not always released through that individual. God is not an author of confusion and will have more than one witness.

I have only seen it three times when someone stood up and stated the interpretation was wrong. Prophesy must line up with the word of God. Many 2nd witnesses come from scripture. What happens, the Lord lays a revelation on someone's heart through scripture but that person is disobedient to share, then a prophesy and interpretation and then that person is compelled to share.

Another problem is that tongues becomes tradition. If a service does not have at least one tongue and interpretation, "Oh the Lord was not here today.." Ridiculous! But it happens.

When you put God in a box, to admonish you, He will show you His Awesomeness in using the most simplest thing to bring His will, small children. In a church I attended, where there was no exclusion of children from the main worship service, often children would come forward and share something that would have the entire congregation in tears.

Of all the gifts, tongues and interpretation are number eight & nine on the list.

1. Word of wisdom
2. Word of knowledge
3. Faith
4. Healings
5. Divine workings of miraculous works
6. Prophecy
7. Discernment of spirits
8. Different tongues
9. Interpretation of tongues

1Co 12:8 For to one has been given a (1)word of wisdom by the Spirit, but to another a (2)word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
1Co 12:9 but to a different [one] (3)faith by the same Spirit, but to another spiritual gifts of (4)healings by the same Spirit,
1Co 12:10 but to another (5)divine workings of miraculous works, but to another (6)prophecy, but to another (7)discernment of spirits, but to a (8)different [one] [various] kinds of tongues [fig., languages, and throughout epistle], but to another (9)interpretation [or, translation] of tongues.
1Co 12:11 But the one and the same Spirit supernaturally works all these [things], distributing to each just as He intends.

In closing, God is unchangeable so to assume that tongues are not relevant for today is a faulty conclusion. Tongues are not the only sign of baptism in the Holy Spirit, that is wrong teaching.

I guess why most do not challenge babblings is

1. Fear of bringing offence
2. Fear of Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit aka unpardonable sin

So a long answer in context of scripture. I was not even attending a tongue practicing church when I received my tongue and it was at work in the daytime.



Trek

You still owe us and explananion on the SDA SoF under general topics.

You have obviously generalized or else you have visited thousands of churches to know about this wonderful gift from the Holy Spirit

[Humble Pie]

Good post trekker.

Tongues as practiced in many pentecostal churches today is ABSOLUTELY wrong. Are tongues for today? You better believe it, but the chaos I see in many churches today is contrary to scripture, period.

Now concerning "slain in the spirit"...

Rev 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

Say what you want, but now we have a biblical example...

Robertson's Word pictures describes the phrase in the greek quite well

I fell (epesa). Late form for the old epeson (second aorist active indicative of piptō, to fall). Under the over-powering influence of the vision.

Clarke has some more to say...

I fell at his feet as dead - The appearance of the glory of the Lord had then same effect upon Ezekiel: and the appearance of Gabriel had the same effect on Daniel. The terrible splendor of such majesty was more than the apostle could bear, and he fell down deprived of his senses, but was soon enabled to behold the vision by a communication of strength from our Lord’s right hand.

So does Barnes...

And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead - As if I were dead; deprived of sense and consciousness. He was overwhelmed with the suddenness of the vision; he saw that this was a divine being; but he did not as yet know that it was the Saviour.

None of these scholars are pentecostal, many were very non-pentecostal, but they all agree. Before you say that something is unbiblical, you had better make sure it is not really there...