Speaking in tongues

[presidente]

A sign is most certainly a miracle that will have most people change their mind and believe in God.

But my question still is, how does speaking things that i don't understand a sign to me? a sign for what? what i'm i supposed to do after you spoken things to me that i don't understand?

I was in a Bible quiz program when I was a teenager, and the first book I memorized was I Corinthians. This passage we are discussing confused me. Why would tongues be a sign to unbelievers, yet Paul argues that if people speak in tongues, unbelievers respond with unbelief? Let's take a loot at what Paul says and the the flow of argument in the passage.

21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 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.
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

Notice the 'logical connectors' here in the passage. Notice 'wherefore' in 'Wherefore tongues are for a sign...' This connects back to the previous verse which tells us that when the LORD speaks with men of other tongues and other lips, the people do not hear.

Notice also 'If therefore...' The hypothetical scenario of the unlearned or unbeliever hearing tongues and thinking all are mad is logically connected to the verse about tongues being a sign, which is connected to the verse about people not hearing when God speaks through men of other lips and other tongues.

So Paul is making a difficult argument for many people to follow. It certainly was to me. The Lord will speak through men of other tongues...wherefore tongues are for a sign... if therefore the whole church be come together...and there come in...unlearned or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are made.

Tongues are a sign to them that believe not, but them that believe not, and respond with unbelief? What is that about? I'm not the one who made the argument originally. It's in I Corinthians. So the question is, what is Paul saying? Why would Paul quote about people NOT hearing God through tongues, then say tongues are for a sign, and give an example of an unbeliever rejecting speaking in tongues as madness?

I believe to understand this it is helpful to look back at Deuteronomy. If a prophet gives a sign in the name of the Lord that does not come to pass, the people could reject him as a false prophet. Prophets would give signs at times. When X is fulfilled, that is a sign that Y will take place. Isaiah asked for a sign that he would go up to the house of the Lord. At that time, he was dying on a sick bed, and he wanted a sign that he would survive. Isaiah asked him if he wanted a shadow to move forward or backward. He said backward. So however it happened, the sun moving back or the palace moving or whatever, the shadow moved. When that short-term prophecy was fulfilled it was a sign that the longer term survival, his going up to the house of the LORD (which implied his recovery) would take place.

Jesus had just miraculously fed large numbers of people, but the people came to Him asking for a sign. They probably wanted Him to predict a future event to confirm His prophethood, following their interpretation of Deuteronomy. He rebuked them saying an evil and adulterous generation sought a sign. Their hearts were not right, and yet they were demanding a sign. But He would only give them one sign of a future event, the sign of the prophet Jonah, which spoke of His resurrection.

So one type of sign is a fulfilled prophecy. When unbelievers or the unlearned witness speaking in tongues, and reject it as madness, we see a fulfillment of 'In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."--which is a fulfilled prophecy, a sign against them.

That's how I interpret the passage.

Usually, I would agree with you that certain individuals, depending on their hearts, respond to signs that confirm the word with faith. Sergius Paulus believed after seeing Elymas blinded, for example. Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye shall not beleive' before healing a man. But that is not what Paul says about speaking in tongues. Even in Acts 2, there were scoffers who accused the disciples of being drunk when they spoke in tongues.

 

[Noose]

I was in a Bible quiz program when I was a teenager, and the first book I memorized was I Corinthians. This passage we are discussing confused me. Why would tongues be a sign to unbelievers, yet Paul argues that if people speak in tongues, unbelievers respond with unbelief? Let's take a loot at what Paul says and the the flow of argument in the passage.

21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 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.
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

Notice the 'logical connectors' here in the passage. Notice 'wherefore' in 'Wherefore tongues are for a sign...' This connects back to the previous verse which tells us that when the LORD speaks with men of other tongues and other lips, the people do not hear.

Notice also 'If therefore...' The hypothetical scenario of the unlearned or unbeliever hearing tongues and thinking all are mad is logically connected to the verse about tongues being a sign, which is connected to the verse about people not hearing when God speaks through men of other lips and other tongues.

So Paul is making a difficult argument for many people to follow. It certainly was to me. The Lord will speak through men of other tongues...wherefore tongues are for a sign... if therefore the whole church be come together...and there come in...unlearned or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are made.

Tongues are a sign to them that believe not, but them that believe not, and respond with unbelief? What is that about? I'm not the one who made the argument originally. It's in I Corinthians. So the question is, what is Paul saying? Why would Paul quote about people NOT hearing God through tongues, then say tongues are for a sign, and give an example of an unbeliever rejecting speaking in tongues as madness?

I believe to understand this it is helpful to look back at Deuteronomy. If a prophet gives a sign in the name of the Lord that does not come to pass, the people could reject him as a false prophet. Prophets would give signs at times. When X is fulfilled, that is a sign that Y will take place. Isaiah asked for a sign that he would go up to the house of the Lord. At that time, he was dying on a sick bed, and he wanted a sign that he would survive. Isaiah asked him if he wanted a shadow to move forward or backward. He said backward. So however it happened, the sun moving back or the palace moving or whatever, the shadow moved. When that short-term prophecy was fulfilled it was a sign that the longer term survival, his going up to the house of the LORD (which implied his recovery) would take place.

Jesus had just miraculously fed large numbers of people, but the people came to Him asking for a sign. They probably wanted Him to predict a future event to confirm His prophethood, following their interpretation of Deuteronomy. He rebuked them saying an evil and adulterous generation sought a sign. Their hearts were not right, and yet they were demanding a sign. But He would only give them one sign of a future event, the sign of the prophet Jonah, which spoke of His resurrection.

So one type of sign is a fulfilled prophecy. When unbelievers or the unlearned witness speaking in tongues, and reject it as madness, we see a fulfillment of 'In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."--which is a fulfilled prophecy, a sign against them.

That's how I interpret the passage.

Usually, I would agree with you that certain individuals, depending on their hearts, respond to signs that confirm the word with faith. Sergius Paulus believed after seeing Elymas blinded, for example. Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye shall not beleive' before healing a man. But that is not what Paul says about speaking in tongues. Even in Acts 2, there were scoffers who accused the disciples of being drunk when they spoke in tongues.

This is an obvious twisting of the scripture to fit your own understanding. A sign is a miracle, that's why it's mostly called signs and wonders. The last thing that can be called a miracle is a person speaking incomprehensible words. Incomprehensible words are neither a sign nor a wonder.

What is I corinthians 14 about? Paul is not encouraging people to speak incomprehensible words in this chapter or anywhere in the bible, in fact, he is against it. In this chapter, Paul is trying to correct a wrong practice and the only conclusion we can make to summarize the chapter is: if you are not going speak understandable words, shut up.

He even says it here:

1 Cor 14:
6Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? 7Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the pipe or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes? 8Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. 10Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. 11If 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. 12So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church.

13For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding.16Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer, d say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? 17You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.

Even your understanding of Isaiah's prophesy is not correct, Paul clearly says it is childish when you say incomprehensible words so that believers say ye are mad.

1 Cor 14:
18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

20Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults.21In the Law it is written:

“With other tongues
and through the lips of foreigners
I will speak to this people,
but even then they will not listen to me,
says the Lord.” e
22Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers.


There's no way Paul is encouraging such a behavior as you are suggesting, Paul is trying to bring order- so much order that even unbelievers will not be able to say ye are mad.

The kind of sign that was prophesied in Isaiah is seen in Acts when people miraculously heard the apostles in their own different languages and that was the sign that was spoken about. The one you are referring to is not in the scriptures.

 

[Noose]

Add "interpretation of tongues" to your scenario and your conclusion falls flat. God knows what He's doing.

God knows what He is doing, i also know what God is doing thanks to the scripture, i can confirm what God is not doing - God is not speaking incomprehensible words through people:

1 Cor 14:8 Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.

Interpretation of tongues is another gift and since the Holy spirit distributes these gifts in a manner that benefits all, an interpreter must be there when tongues are being spoken, not just one but at least two to confirm (witnesses)- something that is missing today. so no tongues being spoken today.

 

[Dino246]

God knows what He is doing, i also know what God is doing thanks to the scripture, i can confirm what God is not doing - God is not speaking incomprehensible words through people:

1 Cor 14:8 Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.

Interpretation of tongues is another gift and since the Holy spirit distributes these gifts in a manner that benefits all, an interpreter must be there when tongues are being spoken, not just one but at least two to confirm (witnesses)- something that is missing today. so no tongues being spoken today.

Your conclusion is a non sequitur.

 

[garee]

Usually, I would agree with you that certain individuals, depending on their hearts, respond to signs that confirm the word with faith.
Sergius Paulus believed after seeing Elymas blinded, for example. Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye shall not beleive' before healing a man. But that is not what Paul says about speaking in tongues. Even in Acts 2, there were scoffers who accused the disciples of being drunk when they spoke in tongues.

There are other possibilities.

I would ask. What kind of signs that confirm and whose word as a source of faith? There are two sources. One of the god of this world the father of lies or two the author of all things written in the law and the prophets, as the law of our unseen God.

Jesus said it is a evil generation (natural man, no faith) that seeks after the things of this world seen. There are no sign gifts to include a sign of healing. God who does not live in temples made with human hands is not served by human hands. He heals all.

I would offer. No sign gifts as a outward evidence a person has the Spirit of Christ.. Signs are designed for those who have no faith. They must walk after the manner of this world or the imagination of their own unconverted hearts.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

 

[Dino246]

Repenting is hearing and believing.

That isn't in Scripture.

I think a believer can as a gift repent at the hearing of faith for without that faith of Christ working in us it would be impossible to please him who we cannot see. .As always he must do the first work of giving us ears to hear what the Spirits is saying to the church.

The unbeliever repents, coming to faith. Paul was not writing about gifts given to unbelievers. You're going in circles.

The sign was not against the zealous believers but those who have "no faith" .They
require a sign before they will exercise or work out what they believe (faith )

There is nothing in 1 Corinthians 14 about tongues being "against" anyone. There is nothing there about anyone seeking signs. You're conflating unrelated passages again.

The admonishment is against those who believe not prophecy but rather chase after the oral traditons of men they call tongues turning what prophecy calls tongues, upside down .

There is nothing in Scripture about people chasing "the oral traditions of men they call tongues".

It would be helpful if you stopped asserting that anyone is "chasing signs". Paul wrote, "eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit" which includes speaking in tongues. Your position is not biblically sound.

 

[Dino246]

Signs are designed for those who have no faith. They must walk after the manner of this world or the imagination of their own unconverted hearts.

1 Corinthians 14:22b but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.

Your position is refuted.

 

[CS1]

I don't think anyone is saying the Holy Spirit is going to make anyone do anything, but what I and a few others are saying is that no one can just do it on their own. It takes the Holy Spirit. If it is not of the Holy Spirit and something you just make up and do for whatever reason then that person is in serious error.

I don't know if it is unpardonable or not, but I for one would not like to be out making the Holy Spirit look bad by getting in myself and making up words and saying it was the Holy Spirit.

I don't know but I've heard by many that it is blasphemy through actions. Saying something, a message or whatever, came through the Holy Ghost when it did not. And since it did not come from the Holy Spirit then you are making the Holy Spirit look bad by accrediting something fake to it.

And it could also cause others not to believe in the gifts...So whether it is unpardonable or not, I don't know, but I do know that it is definitely scary and not something I would ever want to try out and see what the Lord has to say about it... Just saying.

There is a real thing and a fake thing and Christians need to live in a way that they know the real from the fake and make sure that it is of the Holy Ghost before they do it. And if it is the Holy Ghost then they won't have to sit back and make up any words for it because it's got the words and we can't make them up. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit not of our own selves and our own minds....

why can not one do it on thier own if they have the gift and are promped by the Holy Spirit to do so. who did the speaking? The person with the gift That the Holy Spirit has given them? Or the Holy over takes a person and speaks through them? I read in the Book of Acts chapter 2 and 1cor chapters 12, 13, and 14. It is the Person who uses the gift as the Holy Spirit gave them the ability to do so. I would like to know how you can know what is fake and what is real ?

"I don't know but I've heard by many that it is blasphemy through actions. Saying something, a message or whatever, came through the Holy Ghost when it did not. And since it did not come from the Holy Spirit then you are making the Holy Spirit look bad by accrediting something fake to it."


That is opinionated what you have "heard from many" of blasphemy of the Holy Spirt. The only thing that matters is what the word of God call blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and The Lord Jesus Christ is the only who said what it is. If a preacher/pastor speaks a message that he believes is from God but was not was he too blaspheming? By the standard one has set I hope we were never wrong in our early days of Bible learning .



God understands immaturity, ignorance, and error. All can be done and a person wrong yet have not blasphemed the Holy Spirit. It is no different of the those ignorant that call the those who speak in tongues of the Devil. Yet Jesus said Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was when one equates the Word of the Holy Spirit to that of the devil. And the word of God says that, the Lord Jesus himself taught that. So the many you allude to, do not over rule the words of Jesus .

 

[garee]

God knows what He is doing, i also know what God is doing thanks to the scripture, i can confirm what God is not doing - God is not speaking incomprehensible words through people:

1 Cor 14:8 Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.

Interpretation of tongues is another gift and since the Holy spirit distributes these gifts in a manner that benefits all, an interpreter must be there when tongues are being spoken, not just one but at least two to confirm (witnesses)- something that is missing today. so no tongues being spoken today.

Great verse.

I would think the interpretation of tongues is the Holy Spirit personally working in a indivual to distribute his good news (prophecy) in many languages other than previously, Hebrew alone .A gift that benefits all nations. He does not leave the interpretation to the witness of man as if we did need a man seen to teach us. No prophecy or tongue of scripture is given by a interpretation of man .

Its private between the one who reveals and the other hears. No I heard it through the grape vine or because Peter said John will not die when Christ did not say that.The Holy Spirit leaves no room for human error

He warns us in 1 John 2 of those called antichrists (many) who say we do need a man seen to teach us. Therefore usurping the promise of the Holy Spirit not seen.

God will not share the witness of the His word with men seen. His witness as it is written, it protects his holy place as the coming glory not seen


The greatest in all cases would seem to represent the unseen place of faith, as the holy place.

But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.John 5:36-37

 

[garee]

]1 Corinthians 14:22b but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.

What translation is that?

One law.... two different thoughts needed to understand .(A.) as they who believe not prophecy and (B.) those who do believe prophecy

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.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.1 Corinthians 14:22

The sign does not bless it curses. The prophecy does the blessing

 

[Kavik]

yup you can't make yourself speak in tounges

Of course you can - it's a completely learned behaviour. Anyone can do it if you're not afraid to play with the sounds of your language.

 

[VincentG]

Of course you can - it's a completely learned behaviour. Anyone can do it if you're not afraid to play with the sounds of your language.

Noo you can't...otherwise, it wouldn't be a gift.

 

[CS1]

What translation is that?

One law.... two different thoughts needed to understand .(A.) as they who believe not prophecy and (B.) those who do believe prophecy

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.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.1 Corinthians 14:22

The sign does not bless it curses. The prophecy does the blessing

I do not agree with your application of 1cot 14:22

 

[CS1]

Of course you can - it's a completely learned behaviour. Anyone can do it if you're not afraid to play with the sounds of your language.

that is opinionated and not what the word of God says. Nothing of what you are saying is even found in the bible.

 

[1ofthem]

why can not one do it on thier own if they have the gift and are promped by the Holy Spirit to do so. who did the speaking? The person with the gift That the Holy Spirit has given them? Or the Holy over takes a person and speaks through them? I read in the Book of Acts chapter 2 and 1cor chapters 12, 13, and 14. It is the Person who uses the gift as the Holy Spirit gave them the ability to do so. I would like to know how you can know what is fake and what is real ?

"I don't know but I've heard by many that it is blasphemy through actions. Saying something, a message or whatever, came through the Holy Ghost when it did not. And since it did not come from the Holy Spirit then you are making the Holy Spirit look bad by accrediting something fake to it."


That is opinionated what you have "heard from many" of blasphemy of the Holy Spirt. The only thing that matters is what the word of God call blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and The Lord Jesus Christ is the only who said what it is. If a preacher/pastor speaks a message that he believes is from God but was not was he too blaspheming? By the standard one has set I hope we were never wrong in our early days of Bible learning .



God understands immaturity, ignorance, and error. All can be done and a person wrong yet have not blasphemed the Holy Spirit. It is no different of the those ignorant that call the those who speak in tongues of the Devil. Yet Jesus said Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was when one equates the Word of the Holy Spirit to that of the devil. And the word of God says that, the Lord Jesus himself taught that. So the many you allude to, do not over rule the words of Jesus .

Whether it is blasphemy or not...like I said I don't know. I'm sure it would be different for someone to do something out of immaturity or ignorance than someone who gets up knowing that it is not of God and do it just because they want to look like they have some big gift or message from God and deceive people saying that the Holy Ghost is speaking through them when it is not... I don't know how God judges that but it's not something I want to do and find out later, or anything... just saying.


As far as knowing whether it is fake or not. That is where discernment comes in and people need to be prayed up and be able to discern the voice of the Lord. Prophecy will bear out. The Holy Ghost never misses it, and if you get a prophecy that misses it then you can be sure that it was not of God or the Holy Ghost. I've had prophecies before that were for sure from God and no way the person giving it could have known all the details in it and what was said came to pass. Then again I've had a prophecy that totally missed it and made me feel so bad and had an awful feeling with it...kind of felt like I was spiritually violated by it....and it did not come to pass because it was not from God. And if that bad experience, had been my first or was the only experience that I had ever had with it then I would probably be like most and stay as far away from it as I could get.

As far as being able to do it whenever you want to just because you have the gift. I think it is like healing and any other gift. It is from the Spirit and you have to wait on the Spirit. People with the gift of healing can't just go heal anyone anytime they want to they have to wait on the Spirit so why wouldn't the same go for any other gift. Again this is my understanding on it.

Used to be that churches would say pray and make sure that you wait upon the Spirit. However, a lot of churches today are encouraging people to learn words and speak in tongues and not wait upon the Spirit. So now there is a lot of fake things going on because now many people don't wait on the gift from the Spirit. They think they can just do it anytime they want to. Just make up some words, give out a prophecy and then when those prophecies fail they wonder why people think the whole thing is just a sham and tongues or prophecy no longer exists. It's plain to see that it is because of the fakers.

 

[Dino246]

What translation is that?

One law.... two different thoughts needed to understand .(A.) as they who believe not prophecy and (B.) those who do believe prophecy

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.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.1 Corinthians 14:22

The sign does not bless it curses. The prophecy does the blessing

The translation is the NASB.

There is nothing in the Scripture to say the sign does any cursing.

 

[presidente]

Signs are designed for those who rebel. They have no faith needed to believe it is already established they are atheist.

The Bible does not teach this. Sergius Paulus believed after he saw Saul/Paul declare Elymas blind, and the man go away blind. Was he an atheist after he believed? Did he have no faith? Jesus said, before healing a man, 'Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.'

He also showed Thomas evidence of the resurrection, telling him, 'be not faithless, but believing.'

IF you consider these scriptures, the book of John and the book of Acts, to be prophecies, why do you reject the teachings of these prophecies, and year after year spew out these confusing misinterpretations of I Corinthians? How do you remain in this confusion? Can you not see the scriptures and other words that are typed on your screen, or does the inability to comprehend occur in your mind somehow?

Also, Paul says 'forbid not to speak with tongues.' Do you not reject speaking in tongues? Of the posters here, who is the one who refuses to 'hear' God through speaking in tongues?

 

[presidente]

The last thing that can be called a miracle is a person speaking incomprehensible words.

A fulfilled prophecy can be a sign. Look again at the passage I quoted. And why don't you take a stab at interpreting it while you are at it, and write up your interpretation as to how tongues are for a sign.

Tongues are for a sign because they are a fulfillment of 'with men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people, and yet for all that, they will not hear Me.'

Incomprehensible words are neither a sign nor a wonder.

So, then, are you just disagreeing with Paul that tongues are for a sign?

What is I corinthians 14 about? Paul is not encouraging people to speak incomprehensible words in this chapter or anywhere in the bible, in fact, he is against it. In this chapter, Paul is trying to correct a wrong practice and the only conclusion we can make to summarize the chapter is: if you are not going speak understandable words, shut up.

What does that have to do with what I posted about Isaiah. Paul's trying to persuade the Corinthians to engage in mutually edifying activities-- which means prophesying, tongues together with interpretation as opposed to just speaking in tongues, teaching, etc.

He even says it here:

1 Cor 14:
6Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? 7Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the pipe or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes? 8Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. 10Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. 11If 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. 12So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church.

13For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding.16Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer, d say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? 17You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.

Even your understanding of Isaiah's prophesy is not correct, Paul clearly says it is childish when you say incomprehensible words so that believers say ye are mad.

How does any of that scripture contradict what I say about Isaiah. The Isaiah prophecy together with Paul's application/interpretation of it argue that when unbelievers hear tongues, they respond with unbelief. It fits with Paul's argument against speaking out in uninterpreted tongues in church.

1 Cor 14:
18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

20Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults.21In the Law it is written:

“With other tongues
and through the lips of foreigners
I will speak to this people,
but even then they will not listen to me,
says the Lord.” e
22Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers.


There's no way Paul is encouraging such a behavior as you are suggesting, Paul is trying to bring order- so much order that even unbelievers will not be able to say ye are mad.

What behavior am I suggesting? Paul was encouraging the Corinthians to desire to prophesy and interpret tongues, and gave instructions regarding church order. I never said Paul was encouraging them to speak in uninterpreted tongues.

The kind of sign that was prophesied in Isaiah is seen in Acts when people miraculously heard the apostles in their own different languages and that was the sign that was spoken about. The one you are referring to is not in the scriptures.

The problem with that is that it does not match the actual words on the page in Acts 2. Paul quoted a verse about the people NOT hearing God when He spoke through men of other lips and other tongues. That's the sign Paul talks about, not an Acts 2 situation. You have to actually follow Paul's argument, and your interpretation actually needs to fit the details there on the page in I Corinthians 14. Why don't you quote verse by verse and explain each verse in the relevant section and explain how Paul is really talking about people there present understanding the languages spoken in tongues. If you do that, then your posts aren't going to make sense because the chapter doesn't say that.

The Acts 2 situation with speaking in tongues where other's present understand is not mentioned here. Paul deals with a situation where others present understand the languages spoken and they way they can understand it is if the tongues are interpreted by a gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[CherieR]

So the Holy Spirit controls you and makes you speak or do a gift He gives you? Interesting. Never seen the Holy Spirit in the Word of God force Himself on an unwilling vessel. I guess then none of us can grieve the Holy Spirit because HE will make you do it.

The Holy Spirit is a gentlemen. We can submit and surrender to him. I believe he can help us with that and he encourages us to do so. He is also powerful... very powerful but gentle and kind. Just like Jesus.

There is this story that a person told ,whom I have met and talked with many times, about when he was "baptized " with the Spirit. He gave the Lord I think two days to baptize him with the Spirit and if he does that, he would be his minister. During that time he stopped praying and he stopped reading his bible because he thought if he prays he might start speaking in tongues. It did not work though. At some point he was standing by a wall and then started speaking in tongues.

 

[CherieR]

Of course you can - it's a completely learned behaviour. Anyone can do it if you're not afraid to play with the sounds of your language.

Anyone can speak gibberish. The gift of the Holy Spirit is different. The language might be of angels or of men but it will still be a language however you slice it. Sometimes though people who are not actually saying anything may say things that sound like it is a language when it is not.