For those who speak in tongues...

Hi Mike, just real quick. You had the verses right. The Greek word for cease is "pauo" which is the middle voice and is reflexative. It means that Tongues will end on their own. Nothing happens to make them end. I used the candle example earlier. Tongues just fade away like a burning candle does. P. and K have a different Greek verb used to say when they end. That word means that those two will end when something makes them end. That which is "perfect" is what makes those two end. Tongues however ends at a different time and that is why Paul used the word he did. This is a reality that must be dealt with. Mike, what at least is your theory as to why Tongues end at a different time?

more to come, In Christ,
Brian

 

Mike, Here are the verses we have been looking at in the KJV.

12Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

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

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

15What 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.

16Else 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?

17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.


I want you to try something for me. Read the verses that I posted and remember that the writer is sternly rebuking the reader. He is angered at the readers actions and what is going on with a church he founded. Now, also keep in mind that the KJV interpreters use the word "unknown" be fore tongues in many places here. They are referring to Gibberish when they use "unknown Tongue". This is the mis-use of the gift of Tongues (languages). Gibberish can not be interpreted, only a real leanguage can be. Verse 13 for example takes on a whole new meaning. Pray to interpret gibberish? Paul is making a tough point because what he said was impossible to do. He is driving home the need for people to only speak in the langauge that the assembly speaks because standing up and speaking gibberish is worhless to the speaker and the listener because there is no understanding. You mention the word "spirit" in verse 14 and 15 a lot. It is spirit, small "s". It is not the Holy Spirit being spoken of here. Paul is saying that inside you you may be praying but it is unfruitful if you and the hearers do not know what is being said. People were even singing in gibberish and paul says, Yea, you are singing but it must be done with understanding or it is not right. That is why he used the Bugle point right before that. Anyway, got to go. read the verses as a rebuke and remember if "unknown" is before the word Tongues it is speaking about gibberish, not the real gift of tongues.

In Christ,
Brian

 

Maybe the more solid Christian and dedicated congregations don't pursue after it, as with any of the other gifts of the Spirit? I don't intend for that to sound ugly. Its just the way it looks. Another reason could be they are taught this growing up and never read it and study it out for themselfs. BTW, if we can see all flaws with other denominations but not in our own then I see a problem. We need to take the beam out of our own eye first. Myself......I'm glad to have brothers and sisters in Christ who are different because I know God still loves us all the same. Whether we're solid and dedicated or not. Black, white, rich, poor, Baptist, or Charsmatic or even automatic! He's no respector of persons.

 

And maybe not!
Show me just one verse of Scripture that even encourages us to seek after tongues. The whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 14 discourages speaking in tongues. Nowhere are we taught to seek for the gift of tongues or pursue after it.
DHK

 

I never said you had to, and agree that most people don't. There are many that do believe tongues is a requirement of salvation such as Oneness Pentecostal, United Pentecostal, etc.
Cult or not, they are not to be discounted.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I see what your saying DHK and it really upsets me when I see denominations like that saying that you got to have this or your not going to heaven. I had an exsperiance like this when I was young (and not well learned in the ways of the Lord.) I was told I had to be Baptised in the name of Jesus or I'd go to hell. (I was baptized the 1st time in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) So instead of looking all this up I was gullable and said ok and was baptized a 2nd time cause I didn't want to go to hell. Then still unlearned I got a 3rd time in a Baptist church because I told the preacher what had happened. If nothing got washed away then....... Then I looked and FINALLY studied this and seen that baptizim or lack thereof won't keep you out of heaven....its an act of obediance. The thing is I was just told all my life you got to be baptized, not an actual study lesson and not being descipled right. I should have stood firm on John 3:16 way back then, but I was a weak Christian (babe in Christ) just doing anything not to make the Lord mad at me. Boy I'm so glad thats not the case today!

 

And why is it that those who seek for spiritual gifts are the ones most inclined to speak in tongues.

You know, after reading the Bible, this makes sense. James says 'Ye have not because ye ask not.'

Paul says to desire spiritual gifts. He even talks about praying to be able to interpret. So we know it is appropriate to not just desire spiritual gifts, but also to pray for them.

So if people who pray for these gifts tend to get them more often, considering the Bible, that makes sense, especially if those praying for the gifts do so in faith.

 

DHK

I Corinthians 14 does not discourage speaking in tongues. It discourages speaking in tongues in the congregation without interpretation, and praises the virtues of prophesying. Paul really does encourage prophesying. Do you?

Briguy wrote,
&gt;&gt;Anyway, got to go. read the verses as a rebuke and remember if "unknown" is before the word Tongues it is speaking about gibberish, not the real gift of tongues&lt;&lt;

Based on what I have studied, I believe this is false. Do you have a source to back up this idea? If Paul uses the same word throughout the chapter, it does not make sense that Paul would be saying one can speak just plain jibberish in church, but you have to interpret. It is clear from the passage that the issue is not jibberish, but real languages that sound like jibberish to those who do not understand. Can you name a single scholar who holds to this theory?

 

And maybe not!
Show me just one verse of Scripture that even encourages us to seek after tongues. The whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 14 discourages speaking in tongues. Nowhere are we taught to seek for the gift of tongues or pursue after it.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]1Cor 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

The first verse in 1 Corithians is pretty deciving then.

 

Music4Him,
If you join a Landmark Baptist Church, or some similar in theology, they may require you to be baptized again. Some of them require all new members to be baptized even if they come from other Baptist churches.

I wasn't allowed to preach in a Baptist church once because I wasn't baptized by a Baptist, who was baptized by a Baptist, who was baptized by a Baptist, etc. Don't know where he got my "heritage" from.
DHK

 

but rather that you prophecy, not speak in tongues. The verse is a rebuke to tongues, and an encouragement to prophecy. Tongues they were mis-using. Read the rest of the chapter. Read also 1Cor.12:28 where Paul puts all the gifts of the Spirit in order from most important to least important. Guess where tongues falls?
You are right--right at the bottom of the list. It is the least important of all the gifts, the one that we are not to seek after. Look at the passage in its context:

1 Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Then Paul said:
1 Corinthians 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
--The more excellent way (described in 1Cor.13:1-7) is love, better than all those gifts put together.

Covet (or desire) the best gifts. Which ones are they? Apostles (unavailble), prophets, and teachers. Then he spends an entire chapter (14) why the Corinthians should be desiring prophecy rather than tongues.
DHK

 

Or they are the ones that are the most messed up spiritually. Perhaps it is not God giving you those so-called "gifts." I don't believe it is. I don't believe those "gifts" are from God at all.

James 4:3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
--Theology based on experience (the greater part of the Charismatic movement) ends up with an aberrant theology based on a shaky foundation. The foundation needs to be the Word of God. That is our authority; not our experiences. Thus the argument: "I know, because I have had the experience is totally invalid." Mormons and Hindus have had the experience too.

Many people ask for an experience. So what! Does that mean the tongue speaking experiences of the Mormons are valid?

He requires an interpeter for somenone speaking in a different language. Thus the necessity (at that time and age) for praying for an interpreter.
He commands to desire the "best" or better gifts, which automatically eliminates tongues. See 1Cor.12:28-31. But, of course all that is moot when you believe that the Bible teaches that tongues have ceased.

It doesn't make sense at all. In fact it goes directly contrary to the teaching of the Bible. The Bible teaches: "He gave gifts unto men." God gave some gifts to some members; and some gifts to others. They didn't have to seek after other gifts; God gave them the one that HE wanted them to have. Some were jealous in the Corinthian church that they didn't have the more showy "spiritual-looking" gift, that every one could see. Their gift was the "gift of helps," something anyone could do. They wanted to be seen, to show off. It was pride that Paul was dealing with. It is pride today as well. It is an ego-trip--an experience that people want.
DHK

 

but rather that you prophecy, not speak in tongues. The verse is a rebuke to tongues, and an encouragement to prophecy. Tongues they were mis-using. Read the rest of the chapter. Read also 1Cor.12:28 where Paul puts all the gifts of the Spirit in order from most important to least important. Guess where tongues falls?
You are right--right at the bottom of the list. It is the least important of all the gifts, the one that we are not to seek after. Look at the passage in its context:

1 Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Then Paul said:
1 Corinthians 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
--The more excellent way (described in 1Cor.13:1-7) is love, better than all those gifts put together.

Covet (or desire) the best gifts. Which ones are they? Apostles (unavailble), prophets, and teachers. Then he spends an entire chapter (14) why the Corinthians should be desiring prophecy rather than tongues.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I do not see this as a rebuke of tongues but of Paul setting them straight as to how the gift of tongues should be used.
1Cor. 14:5 ....for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
By this if you speak in tongues and with the interpretation.....then what is greater? Why did Paul say "EXCEPT" he interpret meaning the tongues, because... then the church gets edified.

quote by DHK
-------------------------------------------------
Guess where tongues falls?
You are right--right at the bottom of the list. It is the least important of all the gifts, the one that we are not to seek after. Look at the passage in its context:

1 Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
-------------------------------------------------

1Cor. 12:23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

=================================================

1Cor. 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.


As I understand it 1 Cor. 14:39 is saying don't forbid anyone from speaking in tongues. Even still from other scriptures in 1 Cor.14 there ought to be an interpreter.

 

It is both a comparison and a rebuke.
The greater gift is prophecy; therefore prophecy; it has understanding and tongues does not.
The only condition under which one could speak in another known foreign language was if he had an interpreter for that real known foreign language (that is what the gift of speaking in tongues is).
Do you have an interpreter for the times you speak in tongues?
What language do you speak in?
What language is it interpreted into?
Who benefits by it?

The purpose of the gift of languages is that their might be fruitful communication between two people. Is there?

And the point being?? Tongues was the more showy gift sought after because the members were carnal (1Cor.3:1), not because they were spiritual. If they followed Paul's advice there would be no problem at Corinth.

=================================================

It doesn't say to seek tongues. There is not a verse in the Bible that says to seek or pursue after this gift. All that says is: In a generation where tongues is dying out and already starting to cease, don't forbid those few who do have the genuine gift to speak, providing they follow the restrictions that I have given you in this epistle (which includes, BTW, women keeping silent in the church).
DHK

 

DHK

You are reading rebukes into the text where there is not evidence for them--eisegesis.

You seem to think of tongues as a 'bad gift.' That idea does not line up with what Jesus said about God giving good gifts to His children.

 

1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

Yes! "That ye may prophesy", but it still says to desire spiritual gifts.

Really! Wow I read it and didn't come up with that. Do you have scripture stating that spiritual gifts will cease?

Not so.... if you understand that this scripture was speaking of UNLEARNED women. It would be a shame for a woman to speak about something she knows nothing about.
1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

 

Regarding the teaching in Corinthians concerning spiritual gifts, DHK said...

I have left unbolded the parts that are from the scriptures and have bolded the parts added by denominational hierarchies and theological schools who are biased against the gift of tongues.

Sadly,

Mike

 

You say you are sad Mike, but this is a false accusation.

Have you ever used a commentary Mike? If so, you're assessment and statement is very hypocritical. What I gave you was a commentary on a verse of Scripture; albeit my commentary, but nevertheless a commentary. It was neither adding to, nor taking away from the Word of God, but merely commenting on one verse of it--as I have many times before.

I do not belong to a denominational hierarchy.
My beliefs are based on the Bible, not on someone else's thinking or opinions.

Sadly,
DHK

 

DHK,

Yes. Several. I own several. Also study bibles. I also have a library full of good christian books. All of those things are a great help, but as you know we are to never...under any circumstances...consider any or all of them to be inerrant. That would place you and I in the same category as the Roman Catholics. Praise God you and I know better than that. We consider what good commentaries have to say, but always realise that it is the scriptures that are innerrant...not the works of men, no matter how good those works may be.

Regarding the topic at hand here, not all commentaries and study bibles see things your way. Some do...while some see things my way on this issue.

The ones putting those commentariies, study bibles and books...the ones believing as I do...know Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and the priciples of scriptural exegesis and hermaneutics, just as your authors do. Yet they see the scriptures as teaching what I am promoting on this issue.

But regarding what I said, that is a different thing. You referred to a specific passage of scripture and said that it said something it didnt say. That passage says nothing about...

"In a generation where tongues is dying out and already starting to cease, don't forbid tongues"

That view is the opinion of men in seminaries and hiearchial bodies who come to those conclusions.

I didnt say that you were. Only that hiearachial bodies have decided that they have the correct interpretation of those passages. Other hieararchial bodies just a learned and careful about the scriptures disagree with them.

As I do.

Me too.

God bless,

Mike

 

No, Mike.
That is my view, coming from my own study of the Scriptures. It comes from comparing Scripture with Scripture. Certainly everything I said is not contained within that one verse. I never claimed that it was. It was gleaned from other parts of Scripture, and thus the sense of the meaning of that verse. That is what a commentary does. It not some seminary's point of view, or a denominational point of view; it is mine--coming from my study of the Scriptures. If it was someone elses I would have referenced it for you.
DHK

 

Yes. 1Cor.13:8-13
Verse 8--Tongues shall cease. They did when the Bible was complete.

You have no Scriptural support for this. When is says women, it means women: "all the women of the world: red and yellow, black and white..."

1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

From verse 36 onward the subject has changed and is not longer talking of women speaking in the church. That much is plain to see.
DHK