Featured Were the tongues the same?

Acts 2:
Acts 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
Acts 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
--In this case they were praising God. It got the attention of a crowd that numbered about 100,000. They were accused of being drunk. It gave Peter the opportunity to preach.

Acts 10
Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
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.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
--They spoke with tongues and magnified the Lord.
The purpose was the same as in Acts 2. Verse 45 states "they of the circumcision which believed were astonished...because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
It was a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles had received the message of God. Otherwise they (the Jews) would not have believed. They were astonished at this event.

Acts 19
Acts 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
--Apparently the ones in this incident had been influenced by the preaching of Apollos (ch. 18) who also did not have a full understanding of the gospel.
Acts 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
--They were disciples of John the Baptist but had never heard of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
--They still believed on the one who was to come.

Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
--We infer here that salvation was explained more carefully to them.

Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
--It doesn't not specifically give content of what they said or what they prophesied. Remember they had already been taught some by Apollos. This was a different situation.

The above three incidents are all historical, telling what happened and why. They all involve Jews, and how the gospel went out to certain Jewish groups.

In 1Cor.12-14, time had passed. The doctrine of the "gift of tongues" for the church had been established. Paul is teaching about spiritual gifts not the history of the church. It is a completely different scenario. In the above three cases there was a sudden miraculous happening, but not necessarily any gift was given.
In 1Cor.12-114 Paul speaks of gifts that were distributed among the members of the church. That is the difference. Tongues in every case, both in Acts and in 1Cor. are always known languages, as they are translated in the ASV and other translations.

 

As we are to do in everything.
The coming of Christ is imminent. It was then and is now. Paul expected Christ to come in his time. That very doctrine is taught in that verse. He also hoped to see the completed canon in his time. That also is evident by his writings. He could not predict when his death would be, how long he would live, when Christ was going to come again, how long the canon would take to finish. Paul knew nothing of these things when he wrote this epistle.

No, rather it would be to deny the imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why he wrote that way. He was always mindful of the imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ. Later he tells that tongues would cease. He does not contradict himself.

Praying in the spirit has nothing to do with praying in tongues. You have not established that relationship. You only think they are one and the same. There is no such thing as praying privately in tongues. Paul never advocated any such thing. If there was you would still have to have an interpreter.

With you there is no communication. How do you communicate if you have no understanding? You testified that you do not understand what you are saying. There is no communication. You contradict yourself.

Then what languages do you speak in when you pray? You don't know do you? You don't speak in known languages. It is just gibberish, the repetition of nonsense syllables.

I just did. That is what modern-day tongues is. As you previously said, you allow your mind to be by-passed. What happens? You end up "praying" by repeating over and over again nonsense syllables which have no meaning to you or to God. You can find instructions to do such on the internet, proving that it is not of God.

And do you have an interpreter when you pray? We both know the answer.
What language do you pray in? These are known languages? Do you pray in Telegu, Cree, Maori, Hindi, the Mohawk language? What languages do you pray in and how do you know?

If it is not a known language it is not of God.
If it can't be communicated or understood it is not of God.
God is not a God of chaos but of order.
I am careful; I know of what I speak.

They can pray in private. Our private prayer is very important. But praying in tongues is condemned not encouraged.

If so, they are commanded to have an interpreter or keep silence. Do you keep silence? NO! Therefore you are out of order.

No, what you speak--gibberish--is not of God.

Not true. In 1Cor.12-14, Paul was speaking of "the gift of tongues," in Acts the writer was not speaking of that gift, that was given to the church and the local churches alone. There is a difference.

 

So they were speaking to God, praising Him of His wonderful works, does this not sound like prayer to you?

I am not debating that it confirmed that the Gentiles received the Spirit upon them. What I ask were they not praying in tongues also, praising God? Just like the ones in Acts? Both were praying to God in tongues!

But if you follow the same exapmles in Acts, They were speaking to God, because this is the purpose of tongues...if not why did they speak to God in Acts 2 and 10? Because it also said they prophecied!

The Holy Spirit was given...He was the Gift/promise! Tongues along with the other 8 are a manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

I have never denied that they were languages, just one that the speaker did not know. Because if he knew what he was speaking, why did Paul tell us to pray for the interpretation.

 

They could have been preaching. You are really trying to read into Scripture something that is not there. It does not say they were praying.
They were speaking (were telling ESV) the wonderful works of God. That is not praying. The Greek word lelew means preach, say, speak, talk, tell, utter, but NOT pray.

NO. There is no evidence of that.

Look at the prophecy in the OT. It was mostly preaching, proclaiming God's truth, and some foretelling. It was not praying. The examples given give no indication of praying.

Why wasn't he given in Acts 8 then?
Wasn't the Holy Spirit manifested then? Please explain.
Read 1Cor.12 carefully. The gifts of the Spirit are listed twice. They are not listed as "manifestations," but as gifts. They are given as gifts as they are defined as gifts also in 1:7. Over and over again they are referred to as gifts. Heb.2:3,4 refers to them as gifts. They were gifts given to the first century local churches. They will not be repeated until the Millennial Kingdom, according to Joel's prophecy. They ceased. In fact if they would not cease (until the rapture of coming of Christ) then that would make the prophecy of Joel meaningless.

You are very confused. Look at the Scripture closely:

1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
--If there was no interpreter, the person speaking in another language must pray that God would give him the gift of interpretation. If not he would have to keep silence in the church. The church had to have understanding. It does not say "pray." It says speak!!!!

1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
If I pray...my understanding is unfruitful...Therefore don't pray!!!!!!

Do not pray in an unknown tongue. That is the message; the condemnation of praying in another language. Paul condemned the practice.

 

But He still expected us to come behind in NO gift until he returns. Where does he speak of the complete canon?

He said they will cease when we are face to face and we are known as we are known. We will not know as we are known until His return.

He says for us to ask for the interpretation! (vs. 13)

You are asking how I communicate with my self?? God understands what I am praying and how I am praising and magnifying him!

Lets not get hostile!! THere are so many languages out there...I only recognize french, spanish and understand English. Maybe if it is German I might?

YOu speak of things you do not know. I do not have to prove anything, I am at peace with this.
What I speak the Holy Spirit gives the utterance just like in Acts 2!

Yes! I pray for the interpretations several times and received them.

How many time do I have to answer this?

It is a known language, just not known/understood by the one speaking. I never said God was a God of chaos, I said Paul corrected the confusion and put things in order.

Jude 20 says otherwise!

NO, I pray for the interpretations! But even if I do not.. I trust the Holy Spirit that gives me the utterance to speak the perfect will of God!

Call it what you wish...but my Bible says it is tongues/languages and I am speaking to God.

The gift is the HOly Spirit ...tongues is the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Maybe if you get that understanding everything else will fall in place for you.

 

I'm working on a response to your last posting to me; it's going to take some time. In the meantime:

But not everyone has this particular manifestation? In fact, some people never have this particular manifestation, ever?

 

THat is what I was taught too! But is seems that everyone that the Holy Spirit came upon in Acts spoke in tongues. Can you explain this?

 

Yes. Look at 1 Cor 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.

Notice that tongues are the last item in the list; that says something right away.

Next, look at 1 Cor 12:30 -- do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

Obviously the answer is no. So it's perfectly established that not everyone had the gift of tongues (note: "had"; come back to that at a later time). So why does it seem that everyone who received the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts spoke in tongues?

Acts 6 - Stephen is not recorded as speaking in tongues, but working great wonders and miracles.
Acts 8 - Simon the sorcerer offers money to be able to lay hands and heal.
Acts 19 - the ones who received the Holy Spirit didn't just speak in tongues, they also prophesied.

So not everyone in the book of Acts who received the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues; other gifts are recorded as well. This leads to the question about why were the "tongues events" recorded (as well as all the other events); and we've discussed this, and scripture bears it out: they were a sign for those who were witnessing what was going on.

In other words, the purpose of speaking in tongues is not to praise and magnify God. The purpose of speaking in tongues was for God to exhibit His power. To try to say that the purpose of speaking in tongues is to praise God, is to imply that the *only* way to praise God is by speaking in tongues.

Now, back to "had." I agree with John of Japan and DHK about the gifts passing, but I may have a slightly different viewpoint on why, and here it is: There are no accounts of anyone other than the apostles passing on the sign gifts. There are no accounts of "second generation" passings.

The ones in Acts 19 who received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues: You don't find anything in scripture about them witnessing to others, and those receiving the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues.
The ones in Acts 10 who received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues: You don't find anything in scripture about them witnessing to others, and those receiving the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues.

It is my contention that when 1 Cor 13:8-10 talks about "that which is perfect," it's indicating when the apostles were able to finish writing down the words of God.

And to go back to 1 Cor 12 - remember that the gift of tongues is the last item in the list. That indicates the least of the gifts. This is further emphasized when Paul says in 1 Cor 14 that we should follow after charity and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that we may prophesy; because, just like apostles and prophets are at the top of the list, prophesying leads to edification, exhortation, and comfort.

 

"When that which is perfect (the completed Word of God) is come, then that which is in part (revelatory gifts such as tongues) will be done away."

The mirror is the mirror of God's Word. When he would look into the completed mirror, the completed revelation of God's Word, it would accurately reflect who he was. We are made in the image of God. God's image in us would be reflected back. So would our depraved image, and even more so.

 

These passages all focus on spiritual gifts and ministry gifts, which are given to believers as the Holy Spirit decides. Speaking in tongues is listed as a gift of the Spirit, which means that only certain people will receive this gift. But recall that in every example of people speaking in tongues in the book of Acts, we saw that all new believers spoke in tongues. Doesn't it seem like there's a contradiction here? In other words, God shows us groups of people speaking in tongues in the book of Acts, but in the above passages He tells us that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Spirit which only certain people will receive.

The answer to this question is found by carefully examining all of the gifts listed in the above passages. Notice for example that faith is listed as a gift of the Spirit. Does this imply that only certain people will ever have faith? No, because all believers are meant to have faith. Notice that serving is listed as a spiritual gift. Does this imply that only certain people will ever serve? No, because we are all commanded to be servants ( John 13:1-17 and Philippians 2:3-16). Notice that teaching is listed as a spiritual gift. Does this imply that only certain people will ever teach? No, because we are all commanded to be able to teach ( 2 Timothy 2:24-25). Notice that encouraging others, contributing to the needs of others, showing mercy to others, helping others, and so on are listed as spiritual gifts. Does this imply that only certain people will ever do these things? No, because we are all commanded to do these things. Notice that evangelism is listed as a spiritual gift. Does this imply that only certain people will ever share the Gospel? No, because we are all commanded to do evangelism (see Matthew 28:18-20).

We can see that there are various things which all believers are told to do, but which certain people will have a special gift for doing. So in a sense there are two forms of these gifts: One form which any believer can do, and another form which is the special gift of the Spirit. I have tried to show this in the different threads... that there are two forms of speaking in tongues? The public form of tongues (which must always be interpreted) edifies the church congregation just as the gift of prophecy does (1 Corinthians 14:5). This is the spiritual gift of tongues because spiritual gifts are given for the public good (1 Corinthians 12:7). The gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation go hand in hand. In contrast, the private form of tongues is for praying to God in the Holy Spirit, and this is the form of tongues which all Christians are told to do:
"And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests." (Ephesians 6:18)

"But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit." (Jude

Not a good argument! Never showed that Paul did either, but Paul said he spoke more than anyone.

It does not say that they were healing. They were not healing in Acts 19 when they laid hands on them and they spoke with tongues. Every example of some one receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit tongues is manifested. Simon SAW something when they RECEIVED the Holy Spirit. (Another question off topic, why didn't they receive the Holy Spirit when they believed and were bapitzed in earlier verses?)

I never said tongues were the only manifestation! I also stated that they did both! BUT they did speak with tongues!

[quoteSo not everyone in the book of Acts who received the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues; other gifts are recorded as well. This leads to the question about why were the "tongues events" recorded (as well as all the other events); and we've discussed this, and scripture bears it out: they were a sign for those who were witnessing what was going on.[/quote] But what we disagree on is what was going on! They were witnessing the promise of the Holy Spirit with the manifestation of tongues. That was the witness/sign!

No, I never said that is the only way! The Bible does not say it is the only way...you can sing His praises and other ways too! But they are all speaking to Him. You can not deny that everytime tongues is mentioned it is about magnifying, praising God. Even in Corinthians! Pauls rebuke was tht they were praising God in church without an interpretation. Notice that the others(Act 2,10 &19) that spoke in tongues were not rebuked and they did not have interpreters. Because they were not in the assembly, right?

WHo baptizes in the Holy Spirit? Jesus is the baptizer (John 1:33), right? As I recall he is still bapitizing people today! I also recall more than the disciples laid hands on someone to receive the Holy Spirit.

Then we must be seeing him face to face and we must know as we are known then. Because when that which is perfect has come..we will know and be face to face. I have not looked at him face to face clearly. I do not know as I am known. This will not happen until Christ returns!

UNLESS one interpretes then it edifies, encourages etc.
Also in 1 Cor. 12:12-26 (pay close attention to vs. 23-24) it says that all the members no matter what their gifting is important! It is not the manifestation, but the Holy Spirit that makes us one! Yes, the manifestation is different and we are called into different ministries, but we are important in God's eyes!

 

You have yet to prove that we see him face to face and we are know as we are known.

But we are still looking into the mirror of God's word darkly! We do not understand all things and we will not until He returns....
Again..This does not describe the completion of the New Testament, because the New Testament was completed almost two thousand years ago and yet we still do not "know fully, even as [we are] fully known." Having a complete New Testament has not caused us to have a full, complete knowledge of God nor has it caused us to individually become "fully known" to one another

 

I do believe we will see him face to face. I simply don't believe you can prove it from that passage where Paul is speaking allegorically. It doesn't fit into the text. From the beginning of the passage, all the way from 12:1 to the end of chapter 14 he is speaking of revelation. Why would he change the subject in 13:9-13 just for you? That makes no sense. Your interpretation is off.

I showed you in James how "glass" means mirror. He is looking into a mirror, and when the completed Word of God is finished he will look into that mirror of God's Word and see himself fully, as it were, the completed revelation reflecting back his image spiritually as it had never done before. It is an allegory. It is speaking of revelation and does not deviate from that subject.

No man will ever understand all things. We know more than the OT prophets such as Daniel and Isaiah. We have a complete Bible. All that we need to know about God is in the pages of the Bible. They never had that. They only had bits and pieces of the NT, especially the Corinthian Church. The two epistles written to them were written in 55 A.D., and the only two books written before that time were Matthew and James, and we don't know if they had access to them. They had the OT, plus revelatory gifts and that was it.

We fully know or have that access to know, all that God wants us to know. And we can learn more as we study more.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
The purpose of the Word of God is to make us complete, perfect.

I am not the one leaving out Scriptures.
Verse 14 says nothing about praying in tongues. It says speaking in tongues without an interpreter. In that case one must pray for the gift of interpretation or keep silence as per Paul's instruction.
1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
--He had to have an interpreter. If God did not give him the gift of interpretation he was to keep silence.

OTOH,
1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
Praying in an unknown tongue was outright sinful because it had no understanding and didn't edify anyone. Paul was saying not to do it at all.

They were not praying, but SPEAKING, even preaching, as the word lelew, indicates. 13 different nations or languages heard and understood. They were real and known languages. Since you don't know what you speak it is not of God.

In your country you would recognize someone speaking in Spanish, even if you don't know the language. Please don't lie about that. That is the same as me saying I wouldn't recognize French if someone was speaking it. Of course I would. You have Spanish immigrants. It is also taught in many of your public schools, as French is here. Don't tell me you wouldn't recognize Spanish as a language. You are being ridiculous. As for German, English is a Germanic language! Believe it or not our language comes from it. You would recognize the gutteral sounds, the structure, the grammar etc. You don't have to know the language to recognize it as a language. You logic is absurd. I stand in checkout lines in the grocery store seeing how many languages we can specifically identify, though we may not know them. We recognize all of them as languages. Most of them we can identify as to which nation they came from. With "tongues" that is not possible. It is not a language.

Hasta La Vista, Senor.

Are you accusing me of being an atheist because I know the truth of tongues. I believe in the gospel, and I know the truth about tongues. Modern day tongues did not start until 1905. That is something you can't explain. What you have done is accused 19 centuries of Christians of either being unsaved or at least of never having been baptized with the Holy Spirit. Are you willing to bear that burden--some of the greatest missionaries that ever lived, lived during that time. Missionaries like William Carey who went to India and translated the Bible or parts of it into 44 different languages but never spoke in tongues. He was never baptized with the Holy Spirit according to you? What a terrible and shameful indictment!

Pentecost was a one time event--a sign to the Jews.
Acts 10 was a one time event--a sign to the Jews that the gospel was now given to the Gentiles.
Acts 19 was a sign to the Jews--Jews that had been baptized by John the Baptist, and knew only the message of repentance of John.
--They were all historical events as a sign to the Jews.

1. When you SPEAK in the church in another language.
2. For when you speak in another language you must have an interpreter or you must keep silence. That is what the Scriptures say. The gift was given to the church, not the individual.

 

Then why don't you understand what you say when you speak in tongues? That in itself should tell you it is not of God. You can't figure that out?

Consider this carefully. Why was the interpretation needed?
1 Corinthians 14:27 If any man speaks in another language, let it be two, or at the most three, and in turn; and let one interpret.
28 But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in the assembly, and let him speak to himself, and to God. (WEB)
1. It was always in the church.
2. It was always a known language.
3. It was always a known language to some in the church who would be edified by it.

Think carefully. Why the interpreter?
If I go to a nation where I don't the language, then I need an interpreter.
I speak English, and someone translates English into (Chinese for example).
I need an interpreter because I don't speak Chinese.
If I was given the gift of tongues (languages), why would I need an interpreter. It is a gift where not only would I be able to speak it, but understand it as well. But still I would need an interpreter. That seems redundant. Why the interpreter for what I have just spoken (interpreted) into their language?
There are only two possibilities that I can see.
1. If it is a Chinese church and there are some there that don't understand Chinese then an interpreter would be needed for those that don't understand Chinese. However this explanation falls short because they needed an interpreter ALL the time, and sometimes there certainly would not be any visitors.
2. 1Cor.14:21 says that tongues were a sign for the Jews. I believe that the "Chinese" or whatever the language was, was translated back into Hebrew, as a sign for the Jews. There were always Jews present where tongues were spoken, for it was for them that they were a sign for.
1. They were a sign to the Jews.
2. They were used as a different language when needed.
3. It was a gift for a vehicle for revelation.
4. It needed interpretation and under no circumstance could be spoken without interpretation.
5. It was a gift given for the church. (chapter 12)

Paul said if there was no understanding it was unprofitable.
Why would you say unprofitable things. That is sin.
Every idle word that a man shall speak he shall so give account of in the day of judgment (Mat.12:36,37).
Words without meaning are idle words.

You can't prove that through Scripture. Giving a reference is not enough.
For example Jude 20 has nothing to do with this subject. It even uses different terminology.

You are not included!!
You have taken this verse out of context. "You and your children" are the Jews. He is speaking of the Jews, and is speaking to a time near the Second Coming of Christ.

He spoke more than them all because he was a missionary and went to a multitude of churches. It is a gift given to the churches. Read chapter 12.
It was not given outside of the church, and therefore condemned. It was a known language and always had to be understand. You deny the Word of God at this point.

There is no communication with God that is without understanding. If you don't understand it, then neither does God. That is a fact. God doesn't understand jibberish any more than you do.

And your point is? It means it was a historical event never to be repeated again. Yet, you try to repeat it, and try to justify yourself and your practice by imitating what was done on Pentecost when it was a historical event. That is absurd.

It wasn't tongues, was it?
There was no speaking of tongues in Acts chapter 8. You haven't explained that yet.

(CEV) The Spirit has given each of us a special way of serving others.

(ISV) To each person has been given the ability to manifest the Spirit for the common good.

Your definition of "manifestation" seems to be off. You have some mystical definition of it. Look at the CEV translation. It is simply that these various gifts were given to different individuals in a special way for the service of others. In that way they were "manifest" or revealed to others.

 

THis will be my last reply to your post concerning tongues! The endless repetition is getting boring!

 

Where does Paul advocate praying in the spirit? Not once.

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

This is a verse that condemns it; not advocates it.

(CEV) For example, if I use an unknown language in my prayers, my spirit prays but my mind is useless.

(ISV) For if I pray in another language, my spirit prays but my mind is not productive.

Notice that these are other languages that one is praying in. They are actual languages, not utterances.
Notice that the word "spirit" in every translation is a small "s" spirit, having nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. As the rest of the verse indicates it has to do with the mind, not the Holy Spirit.

Now compare with Jude 20

Jude 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
--Praying in the Holy Spirit has nothing to do with praying in the human spirit or with the mind. Jude 20 has nothing to do with speaking in tongues. You are not rightly dividing the Word of truth, but are doing an injustice to the Word of God.

Nowhere does the Bible advocate praying in tongues.
Nowhere does the Bible advocate speaking or praying in tongues outside of a local church setting.
Nowhere does the Bible advocate speaking in tongues past the first century.

 

Which is it? The unsaved (unbeliever) can't interpret (can't understand), or they can understand (interpret) what they're hearing as praising and magnifying God?

And don't forget: in Acts 2, it was the unbelievers (unsaved) that asked the question, "how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?"

 

AN unbeliever can not supernaturally interprete. Yes, he can understand in his learned language.

That does not mean they understood a language they never learned in Act 2. They already understood that language.

Interesting in Acts how those unbelievers of different languages were able to speak to one another to ask that question...hmmmm!

 

No "hmm" to it.

So if the unsaved in Acts 2 didn't require an interpreter, why do we need interpreters in the church today?

 

The ones at Petecost did not require an interpretation (supernatural). THe unbelievers understood in their own language, that is not interpretation....that is understanding! They did not turn and tell others WHAT they were saying. They just said they were magnifying God.

I do not think that tongues is encouraged in the church. That is why Paul was rebuking the ones that were praising God in tongues without interpreters.

Tongues is a language from God to the believers for the believers edification. When you pray in tongues you are praying the perfect will of God. Think about it! Praying in the spirit is the Spirit praying through you. The Spirit will never pray againt God's will/Word!

 

Wrong, for two reasons: 1) an unbeliever would not know--or care--if they were magnifying God unless they understood what was being said; 2) they clearly identified their own languages, so obviously someone told someone else "they're magnifying God in my language."

You capitalized the "s" in Spirit, so I assume you mean the Holy Spirit. This doesn't make any sense. It CAN'T make any sense if you believe in the Trinity. If you do, then the Spirit is God. What you just said is that God prays to Himself. Why would the Spirit pray to Himself?

Secondly, there is no scriptural evidence to support the claim that tongues are a "spirit language."

Thirdly, please re-read 1 Cor 12-14. Tongues are not the gift for edification. Edification is clearly identified as being done with the gift of prophesying.