Baptism and holy spirit

[Stunnedbygrace]

No, the person who speaks is to be the one to interpret.

1 Cor 14:
5) I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

13) Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

I know that many people use 1 Cor 14:28 to support the belief that someone else is to interpret, but the two verses above clearly state that the one speaking in tongues should interpret. I think 1 Cor 14:28 can be understood to mean the same person.

Okay, so then my question is: why make everyone sit and listen while you say it in one language, which they don't understand, and then make them sit and listen to you say it all over again in the language they understand?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

You're gonna have to be more specific...

HAHA! probably talking to me.

 

[shrume]

Otherwise, why does it state they were all speaking in tongues at all...?

Because they were speaking in tongues. They were operating one of the manifestations of the gift that had just been poured out.

Why was no interpreter needed for these tongues but it is said today that a interpreter is needed? I know what my answer would be but I want to hear yours.

This has been explained several times... No interpreter was needed on the day of Pentecost because the languages the apostles were speaking were the native languages of the other people present. IOW, the other people understood what the apostles were saying. That is not guaranteed to happen, and it fact it almost never does, which is why we are instructed in 1 Cor 14 that when a person speaks in tongues in public, he must interpret so the church can be edified.

 

[Cee]

So then, when someone interprets, they would be saying: oh, shrume just said such and such to God. And now he just said thus and thus to God.

I believe tongues is for heart to heart with God. When it’s interpreted it becomes prophesy for the Church. Because now it’s for building others up not ourselves.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

No, the person who speaks is to be the one to interpret.

1 Cor 14:
5) I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

13) Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

I know that many people use 1 Cor 14:28 to support the belief that someone else is to interpret, but the two verses above clearly state that the one speaking in tongues should interpret. I think 1 Cor 14:28 can be understood to mean the same person.

But if you don't understand what you're saying, and you're giving thanks while not understanding what your saying, and it's a language you don't understand, but that edifies you, how can you interpret it...?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

No, the person who speaks is to be the one to interpret.

1 Cor 14:
5) I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

13) Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

I know that many people use 1 Cor 14:28 to support the belief that someone else is to interpret, but the two verses above clearly state that the one speaking in tongues should interpret. I think 1 Cor 14:28 can be understood to mean the same person.

I thought I remembered reading a list somewhere that said...to one is given to speak in tongues, to another to interpret various tongues, etc., etc.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Because they were speaking in tongues. They were operating one of the manifestations of the gift that had just been poured out.


This has been explained several times... No interpreter was needed on the day of Pentecost because the languages the apostles were speaking were the native languages of the other people present. IOW, the other people understood what the apostles were saying. That is not guaranteed to happen, and it fact it almost never does, which is why we are instructed in 1 Cor 14 that when a person speaks in tongues in public, he must interpret so the church can be edified.

So then, if no one is present who speaks the tongue, like at Pentecost when they didn't need an interpreter because someone was present who actually spoke that tongue and so they understood, then you should not speak it out loud, but should speak in the tongue of those present?

 

[shrume]

Okay, so then my question is: why make everyone sit and listen while you say it in one language, which they don't understand, and then make them sit and listen to you say it all over again in the language they understand?

When someone speaks in tongues and interprets, it's not an hour long speech, or even a 5 minute monologue. It's typically a sentence or three, at most a short paragraph, immediately followed by the interpretation. It usually takes well under a minute. (At least in our churches..)

As far as why do it that way. One big reason is that's what the Bible says to do. Also, hearing someone speak in tongues could be the sign an unbeliever hears that sparks his interest.

 

[shrume]

I believe tongues is for heart to heart with God. When it’s interpreted it becomes prophesy for the Church. Because now it’s for building others up not ourselves.

I used to believe that way too... But there are no verses to support that. As 1 Cor 14:2 says, when a person speaks in tongues, he is speaking TO God. Therefore the interpretation will be TO God.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

When someone speaks in tongues and interprets, it's not an hour long speech, or even a 5 minute monologue. It's typically a sentence or three, at most a short paragraph, immediately followed by the interpretation. It usually takes well under a minute. (At least in our churches..)

As far as why do it that way. One big reason is that's what the Bible says to do. Also, hearing someone speak in tongues could be the sign an unbeliever hears that sparks his interest.

If God opens a mans ears/gives him his sight, so that he can actually really hear the gospel for the first time, he sure doesn't then need tongues to pique his interest, does he..? Maybe I'm just tired - it's making less and less sense to me...but I'm appreciative that you're bearing with me and trying.

 

[shrume]

But if you don't understand what you're saying, and you're giving thanks while not understanding what your saying, and it's a language you don't understand, but that edifies you, how can you interpret it...?

By operating the manifestation of interpretation of tongues. Tongues is one manifestation, interpretation is another. Both are supernatural, empowered by the gift of the Holy Spirit..

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

The upper room is where the apostles abode (Acts 1:13) while waiting in Jerusalem. It's where they ate, slept, and brushed their teeth, etc. In that culture, no women would have been permitted in that upper room. So the group of 120 or so that met together (Acts 1:15), which included women, would have met somewhere else. A logical place to do that would be the temple.

The upper room was probably not a dwelling, but was a place within the temple complex.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

I used to believe that way too... But there are no verses to support that. As 1 Cor 14:2 says, when a person speaks in tongues, he is speaking TO God. Therefore the interpretation will be TO God.

God needs an interpretation...?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

By operating the manifestation of interpretation of tongues. Tongues is one manifestation, interpretation is another. Both are supernatural, empowered by the gift of the Holy Spirit..

Oh...so some just receive the manifestation of speaking in tongues and some receive it AND the manifestation of the interpretation of tongues? Does anyone ever receive ONLY the manifestation of interpreting but NOT the manifestation of speaking? Because as I recall, they are listed separately : to one is given to speak in tongues, to another to interpret various tongues, etc...

 

[KelbyofGod]

Yes it's not the mind, Paul says he prays with his spirit not with his mind. Your mind can think other things, read, etc. It's the Spirit speaking through you. For me tongues is a letting go, it feels like rivers of water pouring through me and I release the flood gates. It's not something I force it's something I release. It's more natural to me than speaking. It feels as if my spirit is always praying, but tongues is when I release my mouth to let it flow out.

That is well stated. I couldn't speak in tongues fluently until I was in a situation of saying the one little bit I had over and over until i was basically doing it mindlessly (without the need to think about it). Then my mind started to wander while my mouth was still going. When I started to pay attention (with my mind) again, I realized the words had completely changed and I was speaking in tongues fluently...and have been able to do it ever since. I then realized "OOOOH... it doesn't come out of my mind, it comes from the spirit." <--kind of a "Duh, Kelby" moment.

Two things I struggled with concerning that. #1. Allowing myself to say things that don't make sense to my mind (a.k.a. nonsensical speech. Language that makes no sense to my understanding) #2. The idea of allowing my mind to wander when I think I should be focusing intently on praying. It makes more sense to my mind that I should be focusing on what I'm praying...but that's actually not possible when I really don't know what is being prayed.

Occasionally God does let me know at least in part what I am praying for, but most of the time it is an act of faith. And as others have testified, I feel more aligned with God after having prayed that way. And if you really want to see God move...try praying in tongues for an hour or more a day for a week or so, and see what God will do.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[shrume]

I thought I remembered reading a list somewhere that said...to one is given to speak in tongues, to another to interpret various tongues, etc., etc.

Yep. 1 Cor 12:8-10. People frequently use those verses to "prove" that people only get one "gift". First, they aren't gifts, they are manifestations (1 Cor 12:7). Second, we see in 1 Cor 14 that the person who speaks in tongues is to be the one to interpret, and he is also to covet to prophesy.

 

[shrume]

So then, if no one is present who speaks the tongue, like at Pentecost when they didn't need an interpreter because someone was present who actually spoke that tongue and so they understood, then you should not speak it out loud, but should speak in the tongue of those present?

I do not understand what you mean by "no one is present who speaks the tongue". Any Christian can speak in tongues (although most don't know it, and some vehemently deny it).

 

[shrume]

If God opens a mans ears/gives him his sight, so that he can actually really hear the gospel for the first time, he sure doesn't then need tongues to pique his interest, does he..? Maybe I'm just tired - it's making less and less sense to me...but I'm appreciative that you're bearing with me and trying.

Tongues are certainly not needed to pique someone's interest in the gospel. Many Christians have NEVER heard speaking in tongues. A lot of Christians have never heard ABOUT speaking in tongues (but that is becoming more rare). But they all chose to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

But the Bible DOES say that tongues are for a sign...therefore they are.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

I think I might have to give up for tonight. I'm not understanding why they are listed as: to one is given to speak in tongues, TO ANOTHER to interpret various tongues. And yet what would be the reason to be given to interpret various tongues when you aren't given to speak them when the only one who is allowed to interpret is the one speaking them??

And why is it "to interpret VARIOUS tongues? If you are speaking the language that angels speak, do angels speak all in different languages? Why does it say" VARIOUS tongues?

 

[shrume]

Oh...so some just receive the manifestation of speaking in tongues and some receive it AND the manifestation of the interpretation of tongues? Does anyone ever receive ONLY the manifestation of interpreting but NOT the manifestation of speaking? Because as I recall, they are listed separately : to one is given to speak in tongues, to another to interpret various tongues, etc...

SBG, bless your heart! It seems like every time we discuss this, it's like it's the first time you're hearing it. We have discussed all these things before.

Or maybe my memory really is shot..

Or I'm really terrible at explaining things. If that's the case, I apologize.

EVERY Christian can operate ALL the manifestations of the gift of the Holy Spirit.