(Singer)
No, there is no difference. There was always tongues as a gift that was used in gatherings for the words of wisdom as a sign to unbelievers. Those tongues required interpretation or they would be as sounding brass.
There was a big difference. The tongues of the Apostolic times were real languages. The tongues of today are gibberish, a bunch of syllables run together that don’t make another language at all. By all professional linguistic examinations they have never determined the modern day tongue phenomena to be actual languages. They were actual languages in the New Testament—unknown to the speaker but known to the hearer. This is evidenced by Acts 2, where there was as many as 13 different language groups mentioned all saying: “how here we every man in our own tongue or language?”
Tongues of Apostolic times served a definite purpose:
1. They were used for the purpose of revelation. When interpretation was given it was one of the ways that God revealed his word to the church for the Bible was not complete yet. (1Cor.13:8-13).
2. It was used for a sign to the unbelieving Jew (1Cor.14:21,22). Other than these two purposes, tongues had no purpose. If you have a completed Bible you don’t need tongues. If you don’t have unsaved Jews present in your church, you don’t need tongues.
Tongues that accompanied the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as appeared in Acts was not the gift in action, but a sign that accompanied the event.
The Book of Acts is a transitional book of history. The only baptism of the Spirit that happens now happens when one is saved. There is no other. Tongues in not a sign that accompanies salvation. It does not accompany the baptism of the Holy Spirit. You will have to demonstrate that by Scripture.
1 Cor l4:2 is not the gift that requires interpretation that is described. It is the edification (or a person's spirit that is praying) as verse l4 says: "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful". Likewise, I did not know (understand) what I was praying during that event, but my spirit prayed to God and I was edified. My dictionary says edify means to build up spiritually. The bible does not WARN us against this practice, it encourages it. The result of the spirit praying is spiritual improvement or establishment.
What does 1Cor.14:2 say:
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
First, keep in mind that the gift of tongues is given to the church. It was always to be used publicly and for the edification of the church. It is not a prayer language, was never intended for prayer. It was intended for the edification of the church. This chapter Paul is contrasting the benefits of prophecy over the disadvantages of speaking in tongues.
This is a rebuke as Briguy says. Paul says you are not edifying the church so stop doing it. You are only making yourself a nuisance, and being selfish with your gift. No one understands you he says, so what is the benefit in you speaking in tongues. You are speaking mysteries. That is a useless thing to do, and it is wrong, as he further explains in the chapter. If you do not have an interpreter, shut up and keep quiet!! It is not a prayer language. It is a gift used to edify the church, and if you can’t use it to that end, then don’t.
Brian, you said that was a negative (Corinthians l4). It doesn't seem that Paul's encouragement to use tongues for edification is a negative . When you separate that type of use of tongues from the type used in church for the edification of many, there is a difference, but it does not discount one's personal use of tongues that allows his spirit to pray. That is Very biblical. . !
See above. It is not personal. It is public. In fact look at all the gifts of the Spirit listed in 1Cor.12. Are any of them private gifts. Do we use any of them privately. Every gift was used for the benefit of others. The gift of healing for example, was not a selfish gift given to heal ones own self. It was given for the healing for others. The gift of helps was to help others. Not: “Go ahead, help yourself!”
Brian, you quoted :
This chapter is a rebuke not a promotion of tongues Look at
1 Cor. 12:7
"But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal."
This was spoken to the believers in Corinth. The sign gifts have ceased. They ceased when the New Testament canon was complete at the end of the first century with the completion of the Book of Revelation. They are not for today. This is the teaching of 1Cor.13:8-13.
[QUOTEAgain the dictionary describes the word withal as
1. thereby
2. therefore
3. a staff to support himself
I read 1Cor 12:7 to say that the manifestation of the Spirit (tongues in this case) is given to me to profit me (every man) withal (to support myself). That same promise if to every man as it says. It is not pertaining to a group of church goers in this case.[/QUOTE]
Again, your interpretation of this verse is selfish. You are thinking only of yourself. Paul is pointing out that the gifts of the spirit were for all the church. You are interpreting it to mean it is for you. But keep in mind he is writing to the church of Corinth.
That is why 1 Cor l4:2 says:
""For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful". And what happens when the spirit prays......? I am edified and God is glorified.
Don’t add to the Scriptures. It does not say that God is glorified in this. He is not glorified when man does wrong. Your spirit seemingly is edified for your own selfish and carnal purposes, but that does not glorify God, and Paul never said it did. He rebuked them for doing so.
1 Cor 14:14 is not a rebuke Brian.
Verse l4 says "my spirit prayeth". There's nothing wrong with that.
Nope, there is nothing wrong with that. So pray in your spirit, just not in tongues.
Verse l5 says "What is it then [What will I do, Brian and DHK]?
"I will pray with the spirit and with the understanding also"
Same goes for singing.
So pray and sing, as we do in our church, so that every one can understand you. Not in tongues, but in English, or the vernacular language of the day. Be sure to do “in the spirit,” that is, not carnally, but when you are filled with the spirit, as every believer ought to be—yielded to the Spirit of God. This has nothing to do with the baptism of the Spirit.
Paul resolved to doing both and in verse 18 he thanked God that he spoke with tongues.
That's hardly a rebuke.
It's thankfulness to God that he spoke "in the spirit" and in understanding both.
Hardly a rebuke?? What was he thankful for? He was thankful because he had been given the gift and had used it biblically whereas they had not used it Biblically. It was a rebuke. Look at the whole passage in context:
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet 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 thank my God that I speak more than ye all. The reason was that they were carnal, not spiritual (see 1Cor.3:1)
--Paul says he would rather speak in five words with understanding—just FIVE words. “Hi my name is Paul.” There is your hypothetical five words of understanding. He would rather give an introductory five words that they could understand then 10,000 words in tongues that they could not understand. Please don’t tell me it wasn’t a rebuke.
Verse 28 says if there is no interpreter, to just pray to yourself and to God. That is an encouragement to do so, not a rebuke.
Do you deliberately misread the intent and purpose of Paul writing these verses? This is one of the strongest rebukes that Paul gives. It goes along with verse 27.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
--The most that could speak in tongues in the church is two, or at the most three, and then it had to be orderly—on at a time. This is not the normal practice in Charismatic churches today. The next condition set forth and reemphasized in both of these verses is that there had to be an interpreter. Both 27 and 28 state this. Verse 27: “and let one interpret.”
Verse 28: “If there be no interpreter let him keep silence in the church.” It can’t be any plainer. This was not permission to pray in an unknown tongue, for the gift was given to the church, never to be used selfishly. Even the context of this passage bears this out. “two or at the most three,” (in the church), not in private.
Verse 39 says ..."forbid not to speak with tongues".
In the first century.
Verse 40............"let all things be done decently and in order"
Something the Charismatics have yet to learn.
Rebuke me if I am wrong in seeking God in the confines of my own home during a time of bible reading and crying out to Him with raised hands to reveal truth to me. Rebuke me for relying on scripture as I have explained above with the high expectation. Rebuke God for delivering a promise of edification to his servants. Rebuke God, if you must, for giving me a prayer language that is bible based and has increased my faith, but don't attribute these gifts of the Holy Spirit to Satan as that is the unpardonable sin.
First it is not the unpardonable sin; it is deception.
Secondly, it is not a private gift, or a prayer language.
Thirdly, it is a gift to be used to edify the church and was given to the church.
Fourth. It was given only to the churches of the first century. It is not for today. What you have is a counterfeit. Tongues have ceased (1Cor.13:8).
Fifth, tongues of today cannot be attributed to the Holy Spirit, for the Holy Spirit never goes contrary to His Word.
DHK
</font>[/QUOTE]