Speaking in tongues

[shrume]

Ok was Paul speaking of the tongues demonstrated in Acts?

Yes. The tongues in Acts are the same tongues as in 1 Cor 14.

If so then Paul was saying that if folks spoke in tongues as a sign they received the Holy Spirit when they just got saved then don't endeavor to prevent them.

So why do you continue to do so?

That does not give license to the common practice of speaking in tongues as a routine matter by selected souls in the worship service.

Paul gives instruction in 1 Cor 14 as to how tongues are to be used in worship services.

In Acts tongues were a confirmatory sign of salvation.

That still are.

Not required but evidenced for the unsaved present at the time.

It's true that tongues are not required. But God would like all Christians to speak in tongues, and tongues are also evidence (proof) that a person has the Holy Spirit, and are saved.

Same instance as written in Mark 16.

There is much evidence that Mark 16:9-20 is not authentic.

Why do many assume that tongues were anything else by the time we get to Corinth?

Tongues in Acts and 1 Cor are the same. They are the same tongues some Christians speak today.

Interpretation in Acts was in the ears of the hearers.

There was no interpretation needed in Acts 2 because the languages the apostles were speaking were the languages of the others present. That is not promised, and almost never happens, which is why 1 Cor 14 instructs us that when tongues are spoken in public they must be interpreted.

Separate interpreters not necessary.

A separate interpreter was never necessary. When a person speaks in tongues aloud, he is to be the one to interpret.

Should we expect the same in Corinth? I see no reason to expect different.

Why don't you believe Paul?

Believers are able to converse with the God of creation the Almighty God like a Father and son converse. What a great and holy privilege.

This is true. We can pray with our understanding, and we can also pray in tongues.

The holy office of the prayer of the saints of God.

What is "the holy office of the prayer of the saints"? Did you just make it up?

Bearing burdens, supplications and petitions before God of Father.

Yes, we should pray often. The Bible encourages us to pray without ceasing. We can do that by praying with our understanding and by praying in the spirit (speaking in tongues).

How does one prophecy?

By inspiration. The manifestation of prophesy is speaking words of edification, exhortation, and comfort.

Can one prophecy from the revelation written in the bible?

Sometimes the manifestation of prophesy can be quotes or paraphrases of scripture.

Either testament?

Yes.

To whom does he prophecy

To the church. To the other people present with him.

and what about?

The manifestation of prophesy is speaking words of edification, exhortation, and comfort (1 Cor 14:3).

 

[notuptome]

LOL! Speaking in tongues is not baby talk! It is your spirit conversing with God who is Spirit. That new creation, the divine nature, that you were given when you were born again - conversing with God. (1 Cor. 14:2)

If you do not know what you are saying Paul says it is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:14

Babies talk and know not what they are saying therefore they accomplish nothing.

When we mature we communicate with intelligent means so we can give and receive information to our mutual benefit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shrume]

I like what Scofield has to say in verse 1 of 1 Cor 14. "The NT prophet was not merely a preacher but an inspired preacher through whom until the NT was written new revelations suited to the new dispensation were given."

Of course you like it. He agrees with you, that the manifestations ceased. There are probably other cessationist commentators that you like as well.

Verse 32 Paul under divine inspiration states that these prophets are subject to the prophets.

Actually, Paul states that the spirits of the prophets (meaning the things the prophets said) are subject to the prophets. Prophets are responsible for the things they say.

These NT prophets must be in agreement with the OT prophets. Common to both is the divine Holy Spirit inspiration. So revered was this gift of prophecy that if a prophet gave a faulty prophecy they were deemed to not be of God and were to be stoned.

That was OT law, Roger... Also, you (or Scofield) are confusing the ministry of a propet with the manifestation of prophesy.

The church is edified by truth not error.

Indeed it is, Roger. Indeed it is.

 

[notuptome]

Of course you like it. He agrees with you, that the manifestations ceased. There are probably other cessationist commentators that you like as well.


Actually, Paul states that the spirits of the prophets (meaning the things the prophets said) are subject to the prophets. Prophets are responsible for the things they say.


That was OT law, Roger... Also, you (or Scofield) are confusing the ministry of a propet with the manifestation of prophesy.


Indeed it is, Roger. Indeed it is.

You are in error. Or you continue to be in error. OT law was not abolished only the penalty was canceled at the cross.

Paul clearly meant that the prophets in the NT church must agree with the OT prophets.

I'm not the one who is confused.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shrume]

If you do not know what you are saying Paul says it is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:14

Paul said it is unfruitful TO YOUR UNDERSTANDING. But it is not unfruitful to you:

1 Cor 14:
4) He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Babies talk and know not what they are saying therefore they accomplish nothing.

You should abandon the "baby talk" diversion. Speaking in tongues is not baby talk. It is speaking a language you do not know (1 Cor 14:2).

When we mature we communicate with intelligent means so we can give and receive information to our mutual benefit.

Communication between believers needs to be in a language they all understand. That's why speaking in tongues in public is useless unless it's interpreted. But God want's all Christians to speak in tongues, for the reasons given many times before in earlier posts.

 

[shrume]

You are in error. Or you continue to be in error. OT law was not abolished only the penalty was canceled at the cross.

Paul clearly meant that the prophets in the NT church must agree with the OT prophets.

I'm not the one who is confused.

I contend that you remain thoroughly confused as to what speaking in tongues is, what the manifestation of prophesy is, and what both are for.

Signing off for awhile...

 

[peacefulbeliever]

If you do not know what you are saying Paul says it is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:14

Babies talk and know not what they are saying therefore they accomplish nothing.

When we mature we communicate with intelligent means so we can give and receive information to our mutual benefit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I may not MENTALLY understand what I am saying but God knows what I am saying and my spirit is edified so it is fruitful for me - so I will do both - I pray with my spirit but I will also pray with my understanding.

 

[notuptome]

Paul said it is unfruitful TO YOUR UNDERSTANDING. But it is not unfruitful to you:

1 Cor 14:
4) He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.


You should abandon the "baby talk" diversion. Speaking in tongues is not baby talk. It is speaking a language you do not know (1 Cor 14:2).


Communication between believers needs to be in a language they all understand. That's why speaking in tongues in public is useless unless it's interpreted. But God want's all Christians to speak in tongues, for the reasons given many times before in earlier posts.

LOL You cannot admit that Paul clearly says if you do not comprehend what you are saying then it's unfruitful.

God does not want all Christians to speak in tongues. if God wanted every Christian to speak in tongues when everyone was born again they would speak in tongues. Doesn't happen and did not happen every time in the apostolic church. You rzeal is running away with you again.

You cannot see how what you say is tongues contradicts what God clearly states in His word.

I may not MENTALLY understand what I am saying but God knows what I am saying and my spirit is edified so it is fruitful for me - so I will do both - I pray with my spirit but I will also pray with my understanding.

Yet Paul says it is unfruitful. Unfruitful is not good. We are admonished to pray with our understanding not in unknown tongues. We are never instructed to pray in tongues. Jesus gave the model prayer to the apostles and did not tell them to pray in unknown tongues. Knowledge, understanding and wisdom are prized in Jewish thinking.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[7seasrekeyed]

oh are we back to this again?

Paul said it was unfruitful if it was interpreted

He never ever said it was unfruitful otherwise

sad that the only defense of a cessationist platform is messing with what the Bible actually says

I can't believe it...but then I should know better...full circle just like every thread

the phrase unfruitful works of darkness comes to mind with this constant desire to smush out what scripture states with regards to all the gifts of the spirit

and as usual, teaching is still operating of course, in those who think they have that gift

you don't have that gift if you are a cessationist

 

[shrume]

oh are we back to this again?

Paul said it was unfruitful if it was interpreted

I think you meant it was unfruitful if it was NOT interpreted.

He never ever said it was unfruitful otherwise

sad that the only defense of a cessationist platform is messing with what the Bible actually says

I can't believe it...but then I should know better...full circle just like every thread

the phrase unfruitful works of darkness comes to mind with this constant desire to smush out what scripture states with regards to all the gifts of the spirit

and as usual, teaching is still operating of course, in those who think they have that gift

you don't have that gift if you are a cessationist

Even cessationists have the ability to operate the manifestation of speaking in tongues (assuming they're Christian, of course.).

 

[notuptome]

oh are we back to this again?

Paul said it was unfruitful if it was interpreted

He never ever said it was unfruitful otherwise

sad that the only defense of a cessationist platform is messing with what the Bible actually says

I can't believe it...but then I should know better...full circle just like every thread

the phrase unfruitful works of darkness comes to mind with this constant desire to smush out what scripture states with regards to all the gifts of the spirit

and as usual, teaching is still operating of course, in those who think they have that gift

you don't have that gift if you are a cessationist

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Read the verse before you respond.

The following verse continues the thought.

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

Different spirit in each verse. This should put to rest the idea that praying in the spirit is praying in tongues. Praying in tongues is praying in the human spirit not the Holy Spirit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[peacefulbeliever]

LOL You cannot admit that Paul clearly says if you do not comprehend what you are saying then it's unfruitful.

God does not want all Christians to speak in tongues. if God wanted every Christian to speak in tongues when everyone was born again they would speak in tongues. Doesn't happen and did not happen every time in the apostolic church. You rzeal is running away with you again.
You cannot see how what you say is tongues contradicts what God clearly states in His word.

God does want all Christians to speak in tongues - by revelation Paul wrote "I would that you all speak in tongues" - God gave Paul those words to write - therefore it is God saying, "i would that you all speak in tongues" - I would meaning I "want", I "desire", I "wish" . . .

Most do not speak in tongues because they think that God "possesses" people and "makes" them speak in tongues or they do not fully understand that the "manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man for the common good" or that it is a "gift" given only to certain believers. Many reasons why they do not manifest.

Yet Paul says it is unfruitful. Unfruitful is not good. We are admonished to pray with our understanding not in unknown tongues. We are never instructed to pray in tongues. Jesus gave the model prayer to the apostles and did not tell them to pray in unknown tongues. Knowledge, understanding and wisdom are prized in Jewish thinking.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful. Paul says his "understanding is unfruitful" not that tongues are unfruitful.[/QUOTE]

 

[7seasrekeyed]

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Read the verse before you respond.

The following verse continues the thought.

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

Different spirit in each verse. This should put to rest the idea that praying in the spirit is praying in tongues. Praying in tongues is praying in the human spirit not the Holy Spirit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

how do you differentiate between in the spirit and then with the understanding

it's just you with your one trick pony cessationist agenda

again

you are simply detailing your own misunderstanding of what is being said

and by now, after 100's if not 1000's of posts from you trying to kill tongues once and for all, it has me like

 

[notuptome]

how do you differentiate between in the spirit and then with the understanding

it's just you with your one trick pony cessationist agenda

again

you are simply detailing your own misunderstanding of what is being said

and by now, after 100's if not 1000's of posts from you trying to kill tongues once and for all, it has me like

The Holy Spirit does not lead you into unfruitful prayer. The Holy Spirit is a revealer of truth and knowledge. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

God does want all Christians to speak in tongues - by revelation Paul wrote "I would that you all speak in tongues" - God gave Paul those words to write - therefore it is God saying, "i would that you all speak in tongues" - I would meaning I "want", I "desire", I "wish" . . .

Most do not speak in tongues because they think that God "possesses" people and "makes" them speak in tongues or they do not fully understand that the "manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man for the common good" or that it is a "gift" given only to certain believers. Many reasons why they do not manifest.

For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful. Paul says his "understanding is unfruitful" not that tongues are unfruitful.

The tongues are unfruitful because there is no understanding.

The Holy Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God. Romans 8.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shrume]

The tongues are unfruitful because there is no understanding.

The Holy Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God. Romans 8.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I've never run across anyone as obstinate as you, Roger. You are willing to say anything, make up anything, twist anything in any way you can in your attempts to support your position. You have misquoted Paul several times, claimed that tongues are unbiblical in the new covenant (and then had to reneg), and simply refuse to read what is written in the Bible.

Tongues are unfruitful when spoken in public unless they are interpreted. When a person speaks in tongues, it edifies him:

1 Cor 14:
4) He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

When tongues is spoken aloud in the church and interpreted, the church is edified.

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.

And speaking by the spirit, praying by the spirit, and blessing with the spirit are all the same thing. They are other names for speaking in tongues.

1 Cor 12:
3) Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and thatno man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

1 Cor 14:
13) Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14) For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15) What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16) Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

If you cannot see these things, it's because you don't want to.

 

[Dino246]

There are many other Scriptures which confirm that all prophecy is THE WORD OF GOD. And simply because something is not recorded in Scripture does not mean that it was not the Word of God to those who heard that prophecy.

What you seem to be avoiding is the fact that prophecy is INVARIABLY the words of God, therefore the Word of God, whether recorded in our Bible or not.

But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. (Deut 18:20)

You're employing a fallacy of equivocation. First you claim, albeit indirectly, that all prophecy is Scripture, and that any attempt or claim to prophecy is therefore false. Then you backpedal and assert that prophecy is the words of God therefore the Word of God (ie. Scripture). I suspect you don't see the inconsistency of your position.

You now cannot continue to claim that "modern prophecies are automatically false because the canon of Scripture is closed", because you have admitted that not all prophecy is recorded in Scripture. That leaves room for prophecy spoken today which is not intended by God to be added to Scripture.

In chess, that would warrant the call of "Check!"

 

[garee]

Tongues is God brining new prophecy (the word of God) in other understandable languages other than Hebrew alone.

It is a sign against the unbelieving Jew who refuses to hear prophecy (all that is written in the law and prophets) but rather makes prophecy the word of God to no effect through the oral traditions of men therefore mocking the word of God .God mocks the with stammering lips. It confirms they do not have the Holy Spirit. Some that walk by sight turn that upside down

 

[garee]

You're employing a fallacy of equivocation. First you claim, albeit indirectly, that all prophecy is Scripture, and that any attempt or claim to prophecy is therefore false. Then you backpedal and assert that prophecy is the words of God therefore the Word of God (ie. Scripture). I suspect you don't see the inconsistency of your position.

You now cannot continue to claim that "modern prophecies are automatically false because the canon of Scripture is closed", because you have admitted that not all prophecy is recorded in Scripture. That leaves room for prophecy spoken today which is not intended by God to be added to Scripture.

In chess, that would warrant the call of "Check!"

What is the context of the prophecy not recorded in the word of God ?Is the sky the limit just believe something?

 

[Dino246]

The tongues are unfruitful because there is no understanding.

The Holy Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God. Romans 8.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Shrume addressed this at length, but I'll add one point...

1 Cor 14:14 (NASB) says, "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful."

It doesn't say the prayer is unfruitful, and you are interpreting "unfruitful" to mean "useless". I suggest you consider an alternate meaning which I believe fits the context better: "disengaged". Other translations say, "unproductive".

If only my spirit prays, my mind is disengaged. (Paul goes on...) So I will pray with my spirit and I will pray with the mind (thereby engaging it) .