SPEAKING TONGUES

[Godswilling]

This is what happened to the disciples on the day of Pentecost and suddenly they speaking in tongues.
ACTS 2:1-4
2 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

When Jesus arrived in Israel, the basis of the Jews in salvation was the Word of God in the Old Testament.
Yes, the Jews were following God's law.
And that is what Jesus taught to his disciples, to follow the law because Jesus himself followed the law.
MATTHEW 5:17
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

But on the Day of Pentecost only the disciples filled with the Holy Ghost and speak in tongues.

How come the Scribes & Pharisees who are following the law did not filled with Holy Ghost and did not speak in tongues?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What is the difference between the Jews and the disciples of Jesus where they both following the Law of God?
The Scribes & Pharisees is following Neither Shalt Thou Commit Adultery.
JOHN 8:3-5
3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

They also follow Gods' Law in Neither Shalt Thou Steal.
That is why they crucified the 2 Criminals for Stealing.
LUKE 23:32-33
32 And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death.
33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

They both following The Word of God how come only the disciples who had Speaking in Tongues?

 

[Godsgirl1983]

Since Christian missionaries to foreign lands have had to learn those foreign languages in recent times, it is rather doubtful that the gift of supernaturally speaking a foreign language is still in place.

I have to disagree here.
I have known too many people who, while still in high school or early college have gone on mission trips WITHOUT knowing the languages of where they were going, let alone knowing them fluently enough to hold long conversations.
Yet when church time came around, and worship and prayer began they would open their mouths and the natives would marvel at how these people knew the language so fluently during those "special times" but during the other times of the day the language barrier was there.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Yet when church time came around, and worship and prayer began they would open their mouths and the natives would marvel at how these people knew the language so fluently during those "special times" but during the other times of the day the language barrier was there.

Give us an actual documented example (or a few). That would be very helpful.

 

[CS1]

Not "pagans" but "Christians who had once been pagan". Now that may have been a part of the issue, but there was also the issue of carnality which Paul had brought up earlier. Some of those Corinthian Christians may have been wanting to exhibit this gift to show others how spiritual they were. But since Paul insisted that (a) there always be an interpreter and (b) women were not allowed to speak in the assembly, that would have controlled the speaking of tongues. It is also significant that this issue does not come up in any of his other epistles.

He did not insist there be an interpreter. Nor did he say women could not pray in the Spirit or in tongues.

The only control is man's opinion. In 1cor, chapters 11 to 14 are contextual.

1ocr 11:2-5


2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.

5 But every woman who prays or prophesies(this is the church setting) with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.

We know this is about the church setting because Paul said this to the Church in Corinthia.

The idea women were to be silent means they can't pray or Prophesy is not contextual.

 

[CherieR]

What is a Speaking Tongues?
Is it necessary to speak in tongues in our times?

No, it is not necessary to speak in tongues. From my perspective speaking in tongues is a gift that the Holy Spirit gives to someone. It is not something that the person initiates. It is not something someone learns from someone else. I believe there is such a thing as counterfeit tongues.

 

[Kavik]

2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

..."for no one understands him"... would include yourself and your colleagues.

1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps *the* quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible.

The whole passage is talking about real, rational language.

Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything *but* English is pretty slim to nil.

If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one _there_ will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at _that particular service._

In this sense, therefore, I am speaking _only to God,_ since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined below), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” – i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me. An idiomatic expression to say that no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language.

When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying.

There is _nothing_ in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even _remotely_ suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the _listeners_ who do not understand, *not* the speaker – no matter how hard tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….unless the author of the text is a bad grammarian, it just isn’t there.

“Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will.

 

[Nehemiah6]

He did not insist there be an interpreter. [?QUOTE] If any man [MALE] speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. (1 Cor 14:27,28) What is this except an INSISTENCE on interpretation? Else let the male (notice Paul does not say "person" but "man" KEEP SILENT. There is no getting around this requirement without violating the Word of God.
[QOUTE] Nor did he say women could not pray in the Spirit or in tongues.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps *the* quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible.

The whole passage is talking about real, rational language.

Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything *but* English is pretty slim to nil.

If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one _there_ will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at _that particular service._

In this sense, therefore, I am speaking _only to God,_ since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined below), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” – i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me. An idiomatic expression to say that no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language.

When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying.

There is _nothing_ in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even _remotely_ suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the _listeners_ who do not understand, *not* the speaker – no matter how hard tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….unless the author of the text is a bad grammarian, it just isn’t there.

“Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will.

The verse specifically says (it does not speak to men). So no man could understand it because it is not a language derived from man.

You wasted 6 paragraphs when the verse itself denies everything you have attempted to discredit.

That's actually quite hilarious.

 

[CS1]

and let him speak to himself, and to God.

 

[homwardbound]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What is the difference between the Jews and the disciples of Jesus where they both following the Law of God?
The Scribes & Pharisees is following Neither Shalt Thou Commit Adultery.
JOHN 8:3-5
3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

They also follow Gods' Law in Neither Shalt Thou Steal.
That is why they crucified the 2 Criminals for Stealing.
LUKE 23:32-33
32 And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death.
33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

They both following The Word of God how come only the disciples who had Speaking in Tongues?

Yes the difference is:

Flesh Law to follow or Spirit Law of God, which one? Saul saw to stop the flesh Law flowing through him and become alive in God's Spiritual Law as said in Phil. 3

I got this from you, that I am ignoring you, sorry not intentionally at all

 

[CS1]

I know him very well. I shop in his meat market every week.
I also know many of his fellow church members.
We have agreed to not talk about religion.
I did not say everyone.
I said everyone I have met face to face, and there are many.
As far as the Scripture, you and those who preach such clearly do not understand Scripture.
If you did, you would see the truth.
If you need it to feel closer to God, go for it.
I do not. I feel His Spirit with me at all times.
That's enough for me.
No need to discuss this any more.
You will not change my mind and I will not change yours.

I can say you don't understand scripture, too. That is just your opinion as it would be mine. I see no Biblical text or passages to refute my understanding. Just your inability to provide Biblical support for what you claim. The problem with you is you are trying to change your mind. I am not,

The Context of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit is found in 1cor chapters 12 through 14 and Eph 4:8-16

 

[DRobinson]

I can say you don't understand scripture, too. That is just your opinion as it would be mine. I see no Biblical text or passages to refute my understanding. Just your inability to provide Biblical support for what you claim. The problem with you is you are trying to change your mind. I am not,

The Context of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit is found in 1cor chapters 12 through 14 and Eph 4:8-16

Mind is settled and sure and I am not trying to change my mind.
I still believe you misunderstand the Scripture you mentioned.
You approach it with the hope to prove your point and not to understand what it states, as most do when they study Scripture.
As I stated before, you will never change your mind and I will not change mine.
No need to continue.

 

[CS1]

Mind is settled and sure and I am not trying to change my mind.
I still believe you misunderstand the Scripture you mentioned.
You approach it with the hope to prove your point and not to understand what it states, as most do when they study Scripture.
As I stated before, you will never change your mind and I will not change mine.
No need to continue.

well,

then show me from scripture.

And please, you also approach it with the hope of proving your point and not understanding what it states, as most do when they study Scripture.

Your comment is arrogant, and you do not even know me, so please, if you want to have a dialog, great; if not, fine. But don't tell me what you think I am or know from your own bias. You do have one.

Again, I am not looking to change the minds you are. So you try to add these little digs as if you are justifying yourself due to the lack of ability to prove your point from scripture, which I am happy to do. And if your response is I misunderstand the Scripture I mentioned.

Prove it with Scripture. Use 1cor chapters 12 through 14 and show me where the following is :

1. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are not for today in the text
2. They are no longer needed because we have the bible
3. we should not desire to have the gifts today

Show me where my understanding is wrong. If I am unable to understand your position, maybe it's your ability to teach and not my understanding maybe? I can say that your above post has no Biblical text or passage, just an opinion.

I will even make it easier for you,

You ask me any qestion about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit based on 1cor chapters 12 through 14, and I will answer it for you as I understand: take it or leave it.

 

[DRobinson]

well,

then show me from scripture.

And please, you also approach it with the hope of proving your point and not understanding what it states, as most do when they study Scripture.

Your comment is arrogant, and you do not even know me, so please, if you want to have a dialog, great; if not, fine. But don't tell me what you think I am or know from your own bias. You do have one.

Again, I am not looking to change the minds you are. So you try to add these little digs as if you are justifying yourself due to the lack of ability to prove your point from scripture, which I am happy to do. And if your response is I misunderstand the Scripture I mentioned.

Prove it with Scripture. Use 1cor chapters 12 through 14 and show me where the following is :

1. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are not for today in the text
2. They are no longer needed because we have the bible
3. we should not desire to have the gifts today

Show me where my understanding is wrong. If I am unable to understand your position, maybe it's your ability to teach and not my understanding maybe? I can say that your above post has no Biblical text or passage, just an opinion.

I will even make it easier for you,

You ask me any qestion about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit based on 1cor chapters 12 through 14, and I will answer it for you as I understand: take it or leave it.

Let me ask you a few questions if I might.
If I do not have the "gift" of speaking in tongues, what does that mean?
Is it for all believers?

 

[studentoftheword]

believe it or not ---

A Neuroscientific Look at Speaking in Tongues

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/...he University of,as were the language centers.

Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania took brain images of five women while they spoke in tongues and found that their frontal lobes — the thinking, willful part of the brain through which people control what they do — were relatively quiet, as were the language centers. The regions involved in maintaining self-consciousness were active. The women were not in blind trances, and it was unclear which region was driving the behavior.

The images, appearing in the current issue of the journal Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, pinpoint the most active areas of the brain. The images are the first of their kind taken during this spoken religious practice, which has roots in the Old and New Testaments and in Pentecostal churches established in the early 1900s. The women in the study were healthy, active churchgoers.

“The amazing thing was how the images supported people’s interpretation of what was happening,” said Dr. Andrew B. Newberg, leader of the study team, which included Donna Morgan, Nancy Wintering and Mark Waldman. “The way they describe it, and what they believe, is that God is talking through them,” he said.

Dr. Newberg is also a co-author of “Why We Believe What We Believe.”

In the study, the researchers used imaging techniques to track changes in blood flow in each woman’s brain in two conditions, once as she sang a gospel song and again while speaking in tongues. By comparing the patterns created by these two emotional, devotional activities, the researchers could pinpoint blood-flow peaks and valleys unique to speaking in tongues.


Ms. Morgan, a co-author of the study, was also a research subject. She is a born-again Christian who says she considers the ability to speak in tongues a gift. “You’re aware of your surroundings,” she said. “You’re not really out of control. But you have no control over what’s happening. You’re just flowing. You’re in a realm of peace and comfort, and it’s a fantastic feeling.”

Contrary to what may be a common perception, studies suggest that people who speak in tongues rarely suffer from mental problems. A recent study of nearly 1,000 evangelical Christians in England found that those who engaged in the practice were more emotionally stable than those who did not. Researchers have identified at least two forms of the practice, one ecstatic and frenzied, the other subdued and nearly silent.

The new findings contrasted sharply with images taken of other spiritually inspired mental states like meditation, which is often a highly focused mental exercise, activating the frontal lobes.

The scans also showed a dip in the activity of a region called the left caudate. “The findings from the frontal lobes are very clear, and make sense, but the caudate is usually active when you have positive affect, pleasure, positive emotions,” said Dr. James A. Coan, a psychologist at the University of Virginia. “So it’s not so clear what that finding says” about speaking in tongues.

The caudate area is also involved in motor and emotional control, Dr. Newberg said, so it may be that practitioners, while mindful of their circumstances, nonetheless cede some control over their bodies and emotions.

 

[DRobinson]

In I Cor. 14 Paul makes it very clear that if what is spoken in the church is not understood by all it is of no benefit to those listening, but to speak in words that all understood would benefit all.
So how does one or many at the same time speaking in an "unknown" tongue a benefit?

 

[studentoftheword]

So how does one or many at the same time speaking in an "unknown" tongue a benefit?

They are praying in tongues individually ----when individuals pray in tongues ----they speak to God not man ----praying in tongues edifies the person -----

! Corinthians 14:2 and 4

Amplified Bible
For one who speaks in an unknown tongue does not speak to people but to God; for no one understands him or catches his meaning, but by the Spirit he speaks mysteries [secret truths, hidden things].

Amplified Bible
4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself

Greek word for Edify
Strong's Concordance
oikodomeó: to build a house
Usage: fig. of the building up of character: I build up, edify, encourage.

 

[Chaps]

Here is my understanding on the gift of tongues based on what Scripture says…

1. Not all will speak in tongues (1 Cor. 12:30 (the Greek he implies “no” is the answer to the rhetorical question)).
2. Tongues is a gift where one “utters mysteries in the Spirit” and speaks “to God“ (1 Cor. 14:2; 14:14; 14:28).
3. Tongues is distinguished from prophecy in that it builds up the speaker more than the hearer (1 Cor. 14:4; 14:6).
4. Tongues is ”unintelligible” to most hearers (1 Cor. 14:9)
5. Tongues should be interpreted (1 Cor. 14:13; 1 Cor. 14:27).
6. Tongues was not used for teaching or instruction (1 Cor. 14:16-19).
7. Tongues are a sign for unbelievers, not believers (1 Cor. 14:24; Acts 2:7).
8. Tongues was human languages (Acts 2:6).
9. Tongues was praise to God (Acts 2:11).

In sum, it appears to me that, Biblically, tongues was not a gift of teaching or preaching in a foreign language. Rather, tongues was a supernatural “sign” to unbelievers whereas the speaker was not “teaching” but praising and declaring the wonders of God in a language they, themselves, did not know or understand. Thus, these praises in a remote or scarce language or dialect was impactful to non-believers because they recognized God was at work. In the church setting, Paul says, these praises should be interpreted if they are to have any value at all. For if someone is to praise and “speak to God” in a rare or unknown language that most of the audience does not understand, it should be interpreted so at least the audience can understand the words and the praise being shared. However, tongues is a lesser gift than prophecy or teaching because it is not a gift used to teach or instruct unbelievers.

 

[DRobinson]

They are praying in tongues individually ----when individuals pray in tongues ----they speak to God not man ----praying in tongues edifies the person -----

! Corinthians 14:2 and 4

Amplified Bible
For one who speaks in an unknown tongue does not speak to people but to God; for no one understands him or catches his meaning, but by the Spirit he speaks mysteries [secret truths, hidden things].

Amplified Bible
4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself

Greek word for Edify
Strong's Concordance
oikodomeó: to build a house
Usage: fig. of the building up of character: I build up, edify, encourage.

Are we not to do all things to glorify our Lord and for the benefit of others?
How does that help a lost person who might be present.

 

[Godswilling]

Yes the difference is:

Flesh Law to follow or Spirit Law of God, which one? Saul saw to stop the flesh Law flowing through him and become alive in God's Spiritual Law as said in Phil. 3

I got this from you, that I am ignoring you, sorry not intentionally at all

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yes, that is what The Lord revealed to Paul.
The law is Spiritual.
ROMANS 17:14
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Therefore: God Commandments about Thou Shalt Not Steal & Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery are Spiritual and not Literal.

This is what I began to understand.
The Speaking in Togues are the law of God in Spiritual and Not in Literal.
This is what Paul expressed on this:
2 CORINTHIANS 3:6
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Then Paul describe the difference of Literal word that Killeth and the Spiritual word that Giveth Life.
2 CORINTHIANS 4:18
18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Literal Word of God that Killeth Can Be Seen.
Spiritual Word of God that Giveth Life Can't Be Seen.

Look at what Jesus said to the Jews.
Despite of they following strictly God Commandment Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery, that is why they took Mary Magdalene to Jesus.
JOHN 8:3-5
3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

But to Jesus, The Jews are following God's Law in Literal that Can Be Seen.
He rebuked them because the Jews followed the commandment in literal and Jesus is referring to Spiritual Adultery.
In the eyes of Jesus, the Jews are committing Spiritual Adultery.
And Jesus said this to them not just once.
MATTHEW 12:39
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:

MATTHEW 16:4
4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed

Therefore: Jesus is referring to Spiritual Adultery that Can't Be Seen and Giveth Life.
But The Jews don't understand the meaning of Spiritual Adultery because Jesus is Speaking in Tongues.