A question about a gift

[wwjd_Unashamed]

I am wondering is the "modern speaking in tongues" thing biblical , or is it demonic ? I am curious because I know "Speaking in tongues" is mentioned in scripture but the modern one(we see in charismatic movement) may be of at best false or at worst demonic origin .

 

[Iconoclast]

I am wondering is the "modern speaking in tongues" thing biblical , or is it demonic ? I am curious because I know "Speaking in tongues" is mentioned in scripture but the modern one(we see in charismatic movement) may be of at best false or at worst demonic origin .

It is false.....exactly.

 

[Deacon]

I'm not a pure cessationalist but I don't see the modern tongues fitting into the biblical pattern of use.

I'd return that gift and ask for a refund.

Rob

 

[plain_n_simple]

It depends on the particular use and purpose of the 4 separate tongue uses that Paul wrote of. I believe most use the "2 person" public tongue to showboat and possibly attempt to "verify" to others that a particular church is legit. Very misused today. In prayer however it is a one person, private prayer that is drawn from our spirit, to the Holy Spirit, to God. The qualifier is that it is a language unknown to mankind. It's also called praying in the Spirit. In fact, the only way to pray in the Spirit is to use tongues.

 

[agedman]

1 Corinthians 12 states:

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware. 2 You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however you were led. 3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.​

1 John 4 states:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
​

More often in this modern time and with the distractions of the worldly, the believer must confront that which is not of the Spirit of God. It is important that discernment become an integral part of the believer's living, and especially that impulse of leading that comes from God.

Be very careful in the area of tongues. Even in private prayer. God does not grow weary with one clarifying that the instruction and leading comes from Him. Challenge the "spirit." Discern that which is from God and that which is a doubtful copy.

On a personal level, I am not in league with the modern charisma which places great stock in the "gifts of tongues" as some indication of being in tune with God, or having some deeper understanding or even some more powerful anointment. To my knowledge, the OT does not present the prophetic messages given to humankind as having come through some heavenly language.

OFTEN the use of 1 Corinthians 13 to bolster "tongues" is used, but that isn't the emphasis of that portion, but a comparison of how useless a believer is without the very Love of God flowing through them.

It is well understood that some on the BB will disagree with me on this matter. At one time I would have disagreed with me, too, for that was what I had been taught, and I merely accepted that thinking.

Therefore, I would take this part of the post to further clarify my thinking to the BB.

First, I no longer accept as correct the thinking the "that which is perfect" is the completion of the cannon of Scriptures.

If Paul was indicating that cessation occurred with the giving of Scriptures and compilation into the cannon, then it follows that Paul did not have complete understanding as an Apostle of what He was presenting to the Gentiles.

Does not Paul include himself in the "We" of "now we see in a mirror dimly," and more, does he conclude a limit of his own accord with the "I" statement of , " now I know in part?"

Therefore, if the Apostle who wrote a large portion of letters to the churches that are consider Scriptures does not have complete understanding and knows only in part, then it follows that his writing (although Scripture) is also limited, and, as Peter said, "Hard to understand" in some matters.

John records a similar phenomena when told to not write down something he saw. Something that will occur and is not for our understanding at this time. Therefore, we know in part. We have limited understanding and knowing of even ourselves. With all the power of Scriptures, there is still a limit to understanding of even the depth of introspection.

One may state that the Scriptures are discerning and illuminating all areas of the heart and mind. However, even in that the Psalmist cries, "Search me, O God, and know..." The statement of Paul in the terms of what is known of even himself by himself is limited, for he states it in terms that as God knows him fully and that Paul will also be able to fully know himself and the relationship with God. That and all the living questions that go unanswered in this troubled place will be fully understood, just as God fully understands Paul at the writing: "then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known." Paul is (imo) STILL waiting for this to occur. It did not take place during his life, nor did it take place some centuries latter when the cannon was put together at a meeting.

When will believers be "face to face" with the Word, at what time will ALL knowledge be readily available, and when will we understand all about what has taken place in our living?

Beginning with the return of Christ for those believers who live through the tribulation, those who are rapture ready may determine to place the cessation at that time.

Some of us, like Paul, will be calling out, "How Long!" (that certainly isn't knowing as He knows) and waiting patiently for the grand return of the King of kings. For at THAT time, "when the perfect comes," there is no need of the tongues or of knowledge (learning), or of prophetic writings and attempts of discerning the prophets, for "the perfect" has begun.

Again, it is understood that some on the BB will reject my thinking on this matter. But, that is fair, for I have rejected theirs.

 

[plain_n_simple]

You do not have to accept a gift. You can reject it. If you are a believer, the 9 gifts are not required for salvation, but will make a huge difference in spiritual warfare. If the gifts are not utilized, the church has no other means to fight evil other than using man-made or man centered weapons such as "Christian Psychology" with mind drugs, medical science that is limited, man's intellect instead of God's wisdom, and slick sermons with big music productions that make a lot of noise but have little power. These are not "greater works", they are works of the flesh. It's interesting to watch how pastors will quickly point the mentally disturbed to a "professional" instead of laying hands on the poor soul. Why don't they? The same as Jesus said when the disciples failed. Lack of faith.

 

[Revmitchell]

No where in scripture does it say that the gifts are used for spiritual warfare. Payer (not private tongues prayer) and the armor of God is.

 

[agedman]

You do not have to accept a gift. You can reject it. If you are a believer, the 9 gifts are not required for salvation, but will make a huge difference in spiritual warfare. If the gifts are not utilized, the church has no other means to fight evil other than using man-made or man centered weapons such as "Christian Psychology" with mind drugs, medical science that is limited, man's intellect instead of God's wisdom, and slick sermons with big music productions that make a lot of noise but have little power. These are not "greater works", they are works of the flesh. It's interesting to watch how pastors will quickly point the mentally disturbed to a "professional" instead of laying hands on the poor soul. Why don't they? The same as Jesus said when the disciples failed. Lack of faith.

Somethings need not faith, but great prayer and fasting that, not only a healing take place, but the assembly come to terms with their own attitudes toward the mentally anguished.

Spiritual gifts don't aid in warfare, but in helps for the assembly.

But not a single gift has value or is useful without love.

If there is not the expressed living and working of love both toward those in the assembly and toward those who are not in the assembly, there is very little value, for God is not honored when one is compelled by obligation into service.

It is remarkable, that you bring up those that are "mentally disturbed."

One must be discerning in this issue in particular. There is a time and place for the medical professionals to be sought. Just as one may have some grave illness, or broken body, the mind also may have been impacted by chemical imbalance, or trauma. One of the saddest commentaries is to hear a vet is not being given help by either the assembly or the professionals.

There is also time for the people of the assembly to seek God's hand in both the healing and what they can do to bring about the healing in a person or family that is effected by mental anguish.

Too often (imo) the deeply troubled persons who need the most help are left to fend for themselves. Typical parents do not want their children nor themselves around "crazy man."

It is easy to understand a broken bone, a person sick with some disease of the body. But often the assembly will shun one who is sick in the head as if is some highly contagious disease. There is no problem with engaging BOTH the medical professionals and the assembly in fasting and prayer.


Without love, working, involved, expressively lived out love, the rest of the "gifts" are irritations that come across more often as pride and lust.

 

[HAMel]

wwjd_Unashamed, in Acts 2 the translators used the word "tongues" instead of "languages".

On that day (Pentecost) there were 15 or so different peoples present and they all heard, in their own (language) tonuges, the wonderful works of God. v-11 "...we do hear them speak in our (language) tongues the wonderful works of God."

Modern day folks who claim to speak in unknown tongues are telling of the Wonderful Works of God?

 

[agedman]

wwjd_Unashamed, in Acts 2 the translators used the word "tongues" instead of "languages".

On that day (Pentecost) there were 15 or so different peoples present and they all heard, in their own (language) tonuges, the wonderful works of God. v-11 "...we do hear them speak in our (language) tongues the wonderful works of God."

Modern day folks who claim to speak in unknown tongues are telling of the Wonderful Works of God?

I have no problem with the "languages" being the translation. My son has the wonderful gift of tongues, he speaks 4 languages and his wife speaks 6 (I think). I don't even speak English very well anymore. As I share Christ, I tend to weep at the goodness and mercy that He has given throughout my life.

However, angelic language isn't Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin, German, English, French, Chinese, Japanese, or a host of other worldly languages long ago used by God to separate human folks from cooperating.

Paul makes the statement that although he may speak in any language in heaven or earth, and have not love, it is meaningless, or worthless, just so much noise. He is not boasting of his ability, he is showing concern that those who have such ability may have focused upon what is incorrect.

The problem that I see with the modern "tongues" (charisma) thinking, is in the areas of it being some indication of a filling of the Holy Spirit, some indication of special ability or intimacy not experienced by the "lesser folks," and/or some indication that God has given special authority in some matter or area.

If anything, Paul's writing of gifts is anything but an indication of special filling, ability, or authority. Rather, if a gift exists, it must be expressed with the appropriate love of one who is experienced in the Love of God.

I wouldn't mock one who speaks tenderly to the Lord in a tongue. The high priest did so, thinking the person was drunk, but she was pouring out her heart unto the Lord.

However, I have little in common with those that boast of tongues, or make some significant judgment upon others that do not share that experience.


There are some who are extremely gifted in working with languages of the Scriptures, and with speaking in more than one worldly language, even writing. It is a gift. It is not something that has passed away, not until the Lord Jesus returns to reign.

 

[TCassidy]

1 Corinthians 11. Paul says "tongues shall cease." They did. He says in the last verse of that chapter "Now abides faith, hope, and love, these three." What Paul did NOT say was "Now abides faith, hope, love, tongues, prophecy, and knowledge, these six."

"When that which is perfect is come." The word translated "perfect" (τελειον) is neuter. Unless you think Christ is neuter this can't possibly refer to Him. Christ (Χριστοσ) is masculine.

Also τελειον does not mean "perfect" in the sense of absolute perfection, it means "complete, mature, nothing lacking necessary to the whole."

The WEB bible does an excellent job of translating verse 10. "But when that which is complete has come, then that which is partial will be done away with.

The words "part" and "perfect" (or complete and partial in the WEB) - according to the rules of Greek grammar have to refer to the same thing.

What exactly is a "partial Christ?" And how will "part" of Christ be done away with?

Paul is saying is that there will be a time when these sign gifts will cease because something better (the “perfect”) will replace them. When the complete (something) comes the partial form of that same (something) will vanish.

With the completion of the New Testament, the perfect law of liberty (see James 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.), there was no longer any need for the temporary gifts, or additional revelations. God's written word is complete, finished, perfect - mature, complete, lacking nothing necessary to the whole.

Paul then makes it clear what he means in verse 13 "But now (when Paul was penning 1 Corinthians 13) faith, hope, and love remain—these three. The greatest of these is love."

Paul makes it clear. At the time he wrote 1 Corinthians there remained only three, faith, hope, and love. The other three gifts, tongues, prophecy, and knowledge were no longer being given.

Paul did not say "And now faith, hope, love, tongues, prophecy, and knowledge remain - these six."

And the reason he did not say that is that, at the time of the writing of 1 Corinthians the confirmatory sign gifts were no longer being given to new converts, and over the next 4 decades, as those already possessing the gifts of tongues, prophecy, and knowledge grew old and died, the gifts died with them.

 

[agedman]

1 Corinthians 11. ...

Cassidy, we've been through all this before.

You determine that the Scriptures are the "perfect" that Paul is stating.

I do not.

I contend that the return of Christ will bring that which is perfect.

Paul says:

9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears....
12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
​

Paul, a writer of Scriptures, places himself as knowing only in part. He places himself as one who can only perceive as a reflection in the mirror. He cannot in face to face conversation get all the answers. These are HIS statements, not mine.

I take Paul at his word. He states he did not see clearly, nor did he know fully in a face to face fashion.

Therefore, it follows that even though Paul was a writer of Scriptures, that the Scriptures were not that which is perfect, but the believers are to expect a more face to face, knowing as they themselves are known "When completeness comes." When is the believer complete? When is the time when believers are complete and know fully, and do not have to inquire at a reflection?

The ONLY time from the time of writing until the last moment this world exists in which there is no mirror understanding of Scriptures, and believers fully understand and know fully as Christ knows them is when they enjoy the time of the millennial reign.

That you disagree is no warrant for you to demand that your interpretation is the only one valid.

I taught your interpretation for years.

But then, I was teaching what I had been taught.

 

[TCassidy]

I contend that the return of Christ will bring that which is perfect.

And I, and Greek grammar, contend that you are misinformed.

Paul, a writer of Scriptures, places himself as knowing only in part. He places himself as one who can only perceive as a reflection in the mirror. He cannot in face to face conversation get all the answers.

Actually, what Paul said was that he sees himself in a mirror darkly. Remember, perfectly ground glass was not around in Paul's time. Their mirrors were polished metal, never quite flat, and never very reflective. The best you could see was a poor, dark, partial reflection of your true self.

Then he says that when that perfect revelation comes, in the form of the complete bible, he will be able to "look into the perfect law of liberty" and see himself even as he is seen.

I take Paul at his word.

So do I. And to insinuate otherwise is questionable conduct.

He states he did not see clearly, nor did he know fully in a face to face fashion.

Correct. He would not be able to see himself as he was seen until the perfect law of liberty gave him insight into his own soul.

Therefore, it follows that even though Paul was a writer of Scriptures, that the Scriptures were not that which is perfect, but the believers are to expect a more face to face, knowing as they themselves are known "When completeness comes."

Therefore it follows that Paul said he saw through a glass darkly but when the complete comes the partial will be done away.

When is the believer complete? When is the time when believers are complete and know fully, and do not have to inquire at a reflection?

Except that is not what Paul is talking about. And he makes it clear in the last verse that the sign gifts, which were given to confirm the inscripturation of God's word would no longer be necessary after God's word was complete.

That you disagree is no warrant for you to demand that your interpretation is the only one valid.

I don't recall demanding you or anyone else accept my understanding as being the only one valid. Just that I, after a very careful exegesis of the Greek text have come to a conclusion I cannot deny.

I taught your interpretation for years.

But then, I was teaching what I had been taught.

Just as you are doing now. I was not taught this position. I came to this conclusion via a careful, critical, exegesis of the Greek text.

 

[agedman]

And I, and Greek grammar, contend that you are misinformed.
Actually, what Paul said was that he sees himself in a mirror darkly. Remember, perfectly ground glass was not around in Paul's time. Their mirrors were polished metal, never quite flat, and never very reflective. The best you could see was a poor, dark, partial reflection of your true self.

Then he says that when that perfect revelation comes, in the form of the complete bible, he will be able to "look into the perfect law of liberty" and see himself even as he is seen.

However, you are adding to Paul's statement, when suggesting that he says "that when that perfect revelation comes in the form of the complete bible." He doesn't even allude to such. Rather, he couches his own condition as temporary and not something without remedy.

" but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known." WHEN will Paul know FULLY as he himself is FULLY known? ONLY at the return of Christ when the Saints have been perfected and glorified.

So do I. And to insinuate otherwise is questionable conduct.

I did not "insinuate otherwise." That you would assume such is incorrect.

Correct. He would not be able to see himself as he was seen until the perfect law of liberty gave him insight into his own soul.

Again, this thinking is not part of the writing of Paul in this portion of Scriptures. He didn't even imply it.

Therefore it follows that Paul said he saw through a glass darkly but when the complete comes the partial will be done away. Except that is not what Paul is talking about. And he makes it clear in the last verse that the sign gifts, which were given to confirm the inscripturation of God's word would no longer be necessary after God's word was complete.

Again you are inserting what Paul does not.

I draw your attention back to both verse 9 and verse 12. There is nothing about the completion of Scriptures needing to be complete for folks to see clearly. Especially in the light of Paul's expectation to fully know as he was known. Who knew Paul more fully than he knew himself? The Scriptures of which Paul was well taught in, those of his own writing, or the Christ? When will all believers know as they have been fully known?

I don't recall demanding you or anyone else accept my understanding as being the only one valid. Just that I, after a very careful exegesis of the Greek text have come to a conclusion I cannot deny.Just as you are doing now. I was not taught this position. I came to this conclusion via a careful, critical, exegesis of the Greek text.

I have shown that my conclusion is valid with the statement of Paul in the context of this passage.

Show by the Greek text of verse 9 and 12 that the conclusion I draw is wrong.

 

[TCassidy]

he couches his own condition as temporary and not something without remedy.

Yes, temporary until the bible is complete. The complete bible is the remedy.

" but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known." WHEN will Paul know FULLY as he himself is FULLY known?

When the bible, which is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, is complete.

ONLY at the return of Christ when the Saints have been perfected and glorified.

But Paul is not talking about the perfection of the saints. He is talking about the confiratory sign gifts given to confirm the inscripturation of God's word.

Remember the three rules of bible interpretation:

1. Context.
2. Context.
3. Context.

Oh, and did I mention context?

 

[agedman]

Yes, temporary until the bible is complete.

Again, Paul does not even allude to such a conclusion in any part of 1 Corinthians 12, 13 or 14. That is not even close to the topic Paul is addressing. CONTEXT does not support your view at this point.

The complete bible is the remedy.

Again, CONTEXT does not support your view at this point.

When the bible, which is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, is complete.

Certainly, the Scriptures are profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction. However in the CONTEXT of what Paul is discussing in Chapter 12, 13, and 14 of 1 Corinthians, it does not support your view at this point.

But Paul is not talking about the perfection of the saints. He is talking about the confiratory sign gifts given to confirm the inscripturation of God's word.

No, that is not all that he is in discussion.
Chapter 12, introduction of spiritual gifts coming from the same spirit to be given to the assembly by God for the benefit of the assembly. It concludes with pointing directly to chapter 13:

27 Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. 29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? 30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they? 31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

And I show you a still more excellent way."​

And I show you a still more excellent way.
Chapter 13, Gives the more excellent way: The gifts should not be neglectful of faith, hope and especially that Love from God.
Chapter 14, Paul instructs the folks to pursue love, earnestly desire the gifts, and especially cherish prophecy. Making certain to conduct worship in an orderly fashion, and finishing with women being silent and encouraging both prophecy and tongues.

See, CONTEXT does not support your view at this point.

Remember the three rules of bible interpretation:

1. Context.
2. Context.
3. Context.

Oh, and did I mention context?

Perhaps it would be best for you to remember the three rules of bible interpretation.

Did I mention CONTEXT does not support your view at this point?

Of course I did.

You ask for me to look at context, and yet are you not making judgment upon a large section of 1 Corinthians out of context of the actual statements by Paul?

To be fair, I need to remind the readers that in no manner am I embracing some modern charisma, nor am I placing the Scriptures as not powerful. It matters little if I talk in the many languages of the world or with that of the angles, if love is not abounding, such ability is worthless and meaningless.

Paul new the Scriptures. Paul was a writer of the Scriptures. If anyone should have had the ability to understand clearly, and know fully all the nuances of God's word, both the OT and what was to become the NT, it was that uniquely trained missionary Apostle to the Gentiles.

Yet, he declares himself of limited knowing, and determines his own perceptions to be only shadowed reflections. Paul is making a clear indication that something will occur in which there is face to face interaction nothing needing to be seen in reflection or in shadow, and complete understanding of all that has transpired in the believer's life and living will be known as only God currently understands.

I hold that is not the formation of the cannon of Scriptures.

Rather, I present that happens at the return of Christ. When the saints are in their glorified bodies coming to rule and reign with Him. No longer is there need of refracted light and unanswered questions. When the perfect (there is no "that" in the original) comes, there is no need of what is temporary.

By the way, the word used for "perfect" means the end, the completion, full of age, mature, the final goal attained.

Paul is not discussing the completion of Scriptures, he is discussing the condition of the final estate of the deliverance of the believer. The focus of especially these three chapters is upon the individual believers as they relate to the assembly and the worship of the assembly. It is not upon the Word of God, nor the completion of the Word of God.

Basically, Paul is saying that until the perfect (completeness, full maturity of the believer - only finished when given that glorified body which is the final goal of complete maturity in Christ) comes, the gifts are given.

The world sees this at only one time - the return of Christ with the perfect saints.

 

[HAMel]

@agedman..., the GIFT of speaking different (languages) is certainly a gift. Like you I speak only English. In my humble opinion the utterance of gibberish no one can understand is NOT a gift.

I heard of a woman who broke out speaking in tongues while in church and after she quit, a person who was just visiting rose claiming to have the gift of interpretation and said that she had promised to donate a thousand dollars to their building fund.

...the rest of the service was quiet and reserved after that.

Let me say this however. I do believe the Spirit of the Lord can and does speak through people..., for real. But not in a way as described by so many.

 

[Darrell C]

I am wondering is the "modern speaking in tongues" thing biblical , or is it demonic ? I am curious because I know "Speaking in tongues" is mentioned in scripture but the modern one(we see in charismatic movement) may be of at best false or at worst demonic origin .

I usually handle this one with kid gloves, because we have to take into consideration that many well meaning and sincere believers grew up in fellowships that improperly teach about the Gift of Languages. Indoctrination into false doctrines which are not centered on salvific issues does not mean those members are not genuine believers, just in error, which is something that all of us can relate to. Most of us start out ignorant of the Word of God and rely on those who stand in leadership where we were saved. For those born into "believing households" it is just normal that the doctrine of the parents is the doctrine which is taught. Some will grow up and leave those groups, and some from more conservative groups will leave their groups and join this one.

I like what MacArthur states at the end of an exhaustive treatment of Charismania: "Let me tell you something worse...gossip." lol

I have met some Charismatics that I have no doubt they love the Lord, and evangelism is a primary concern for them. The amount of importance that the modern movement of tongues each one gives varies, just as the amount of importance of evangelism might vary for individual believers. Some keep it to themselves. Some flaunt it. The fact is that they will not answer to us for how they walk in faith, just as we will not answer to them.

Lastly, in regards to the Gift of Languages, I tend to think that there are times it is still employed. I have heard many examples of missionaries having occasions where they spoke and were understood by those of another language. But just as I believe in healings, I do not believe in healers. I think certain gifts are sporadic, rather than utilized by particular people. The accounts I have heard were singular, not ongoing events to my knowledge. So I don't take a strict cessassionist view.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

I heard of a woman who broke out speaking in tongues while in church and after she quit, a person who was just visiting rose claiming to have the gift of interpretation and said that she had promised to donate a thousand dollars to their building fund.

LOL!


God bless.

 

[agedman]

It is important that there is a distinction between that "tongues" of the modern charismatic fluff and the tongues of Scriptures.

For the most part, the folks I have met of that fluff grouping usually have some great pride in having attained what mere believers are not given. It is as if there is some secrete handshake, or password, to some exclusive club. However, all manner of evil and excuse of excess has been a part of that group, and although I may have friendships with some, and some may have earnest desires to love and serve God, I am not a part nor do I ever intend to be a member of that group.

However, the tongues of the Scriptures are human languages and are part of a great number of churches even to this day. In the times of the early church, there was a cosmopolitan grouping, often of mixed cultural backgrounds. The churches of Ephesus, Corinth, Galatia... were all larger hubs of multi ethnic and language groups. For thousands of years, the church has had little mixture, but was pockets of believers clustered by culture and language. That is changing, and so more often "tongues and the interpreter" are truly becoming a part of the church, again.

It was not unusual in the early days for the church to see one who could speak to another language, and while that was done, an interpretation was given so no "private communication" would generate some ill feelings, as one might experienced in a place were the language of discussion was not understood by them.

In the modern church, there are more and more mix cultural groupings. Even the deaf have an interpreter.

Further, any teacher understands that some students grasp much more quickly and thoroughly in some areas of education in comparison to others. This is clearly seen in the language course work. There are some who are gifted at quickly ferreting out the meaning, the pronunciation, the writing... of languages. Where others struggle and more often reside in grace of the teacher overlooking the lack.

Even in this day, we call a person, who readily and seemingly without struggle handles the original languages of Scriptures, gifted.

So the "tongues of men" is not a dead gift.

Prophecy in the form of presenting the Scriptures with admonition and warning of impending doom is done daily. It too is not a dead gift.

What some would claim as "the tongue of angels" is a heavenly communication in which the holy spirit may take the feeble efforts of a broken and sorrowful believer and make the intimacy of that communication especially appointed. This is no public phenomena, but rather takes place in the prayer closet, and in my opinion, it may never need to be disclosed. Certainly, such prayer, has not in any manner been left in the grave of history.

So, where some would declare some cessation of gifts, it is evident from historical analysis that such gifts are continuous.

Here is our Lord's prayer in Jewish Aramaic with some explanations.