Originally posted by DHK:
I'm not adding Paul's words. Paul was writing to the Corinthian church existed in the first century. The gifts died out by the first century. He was writing to those believers.
I asked you why Paul would have to rebuke the church in the first century for using tongues if it was okay to speak in tongues at this time?
I am reminding you to take things in the context of when it is written. God spoke to Moses in a burning bush, but don't expect God to speak to you in a burning bush because he spoke to Moses in that way. This was God's way of communicating to a generation of people that lived before the Word of God was completed. As I have said many times already, that can be amply demonstrated by 1Cor.13:8-13.
I know what you wrote here. I disagree with your interpretation.
"That is why Paul said, No man can say Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Of course there are demonic sources that speak in a "tongue" satan is always trying to copy the real thing."
---And you can't tell the difference. Tell me, when you speak in tongues what language do you speak, and who interprets that language for you?
14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. My Spirit is edified,
14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. ( My Spirit is Praying unto God ) My understanding in the natural (intellect) is not of benefit. Which would coincide with 2 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
To use our human intellect alone we would be like this: 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The churches that speak in tongues today do not follow these guidelines.
"You are making a general statement based upon your experience. It is not always the case. Don't live by your experiences alone."
---That's not a generalized statement. It is a statement of fact, and you know it. Don't be so defensive. How many churches have unsaved Jews in them? How many churches ban their women from speaking in tongues?
LOL, I am not being defensive here at all. I am stating the fact that you have not been in every church that speaks in tongues. How many churches have unsaved Jew's in them? LOL, Paul stated, unbeliever's, not unsaved Jew's. Speaking in tongues in a church service would be the gift of tongues operating, It would come from The Holy Spirit, not man, not woman, but from God.
You ignored what I posted. Even the one verse where Paul said, "That I would rather speak five words with understanding than ten thousand words in tongues (or without understanding). You fail to grasp his meaning. Don't speak in tongues.
I copied these verses down in order to show you that Paul was not telling them not to speak in tongues. He was setting order in the church.
Verse 18: I thank my God that I speak with tongues (languages) more than ye all. First that is quite a rebuke to the childish Corinthians. He was thankful that it was he and not them that spoke in tongues. They were misusing the gift. Now get a hold of this. Where and when would have Paul used this gift? What was the gift for? Read 1Cor.14:21,22, and get a good understanding of those two verses. Verse 21 teaches that God would speak to the nation of Israel using a sign (tongues), and yet they would not believe (the gospel). It goes on to say, therefore, that tongues are a sign for the unbeliever. The two verses are connected. Tongues are a sign for the unbelieving Jew. Paul went on three missionary journeys. Remember also what happened on the Day of Pentecost. Devout Jews from every nation came to Jerusalem. Paul, as his custom was, entered into the synagogue, and there preached, in which ever country he was. It was in those synagogues that he probably used the gift of tongues, for they were a sign to the unbelieving Jews. When the Jews heard the message of salvation, accompanied by the sign of tongues, that is the message spoken in their mother tongue, not just in Hebrew or Greek, they were more likely to be receptive to the plan of salvation and believe.
Signs to only the unbelieving Jew's? Acts:10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
But many hardened their hearts and did not believe anyway, just as Isaiah had prophesied. Thus the destruction of Jerusalem came in 70 A.D. This verse does not condone the speaking of tongues in the church of Corinth. That is not what it is saying.
"14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues."
--As I mentioned, if you are living in the first century when the gift was operational.
DHK, You stated: You fail to grasp his meaning. Don't speak in tongues.
Then you state:--As I mentioned, if you are living in the first century when the gift was operational.
If it was okay, Paul was not rebuking them for using the gift of tongues, but how they were using this gift.
It is not operational today. But first and foremost he says to covet or seek after prophesy not tongues. Why make tongues more important??
I am not making tongues more important, I am saying it has not ceased.
"13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and angels,"
---Surely you jest, Naomi. Have you read the context here also?
Did Paul give his body to be burned? Did he give all that he had to feed the poor? Did he really understand all mysteries, and all knowledge? Is this what he is claiming here. When did he give his body to be burned? The key word is "though," or "if." They are statements of conjecture or hypothetical statements. If I could do all of these things and still have not love I am nothing. That is what he was saying. Not for one second did he say that he spoke in tongues, just as he did not say he gave his body to be burned. Furthermore what was the tongue of an angel? Do you know? How did Gabriel communicate with Joseph, with Mary? How did the two angels communicate with Lot? Did they speak in some kind of heavenly language that you think you might have?
22:1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. 22:2 (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence:
In tongues of man...
and of Angels:
19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
Scripture (KJV) seems to make a distinction about languages and tongues (the gift)
How do you know you are not praising Satan instead of God? How do you know Naomi?
DHK
Scripture tells me.....12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

God Bless!