Briguy wrote,
**You said that Tounges, which are always REAL LANGUAGES can benefit a person who speaks them outside the "Body". Are you saying that Paul is not addressing the gathered assembly in 1 Cor. 14 because he surely is, especially in regards to the use of Spiritual gifts.**
And in verse 28, Paul shows us that it is acceptable to speak in tongues outside of the assembly. the principle from earlier in the chapter still applies, that he who speaks in tongues edifies himself, i.e. builds himself up. Also, Paul says he speaks in tongues more than all the Corinthians, but IN THE CHURCH, he would rather speak 5 words with his understanding... Paul may have spoken in tongues more than all the Corinthians-- outside of church-- but in church he preferred to use the understanding to instruct others.
*** 1 Cor. 12:7 says that spiritual gifts are given for the gathered assembly as a whole and not the individual***
This verse does NOT say that spiritual gifts are 'not for the individual.' It says that they are 'to profit withal.' The immediate context is about the body, but it does not refer to the 'gathered assembly.' we read about 'body' and not 'church' until the end of the chapter.
Can using a gift to build oneself up be good for the whole? Sure.
**Self edification is fine but not by using a God given siritual Gift.***
This doesn't even make sense. Please show scripture to prove your point. How can we build ourselves up effectively without God's grace to empower us to do it?
**OK, getting back to speaking a real language that you do not know, to yourself. If I just sat arounf and spoke Spanish out loud just to do it, because I had a gift which let me, of what use would that be. Logically, it seems if I am going to talk to God or to myself it should be in my native tongue, where I have my greatest understanding. **
Paul answers your question. He says if he speaks in tongues his spirit prays, and that he that speaks in tongues builds himself up. We do not have to understand the dynamics of it to believe the scriptures.
***In the KJV the word "unknown" is added to the text. In all the cases but one it seems certain that unknown Tongue, is referring to gibberish and so could be interpreted "pretend language"***
I don't see what the KJV translators adding 'unknown' has to do with it. And from reading the passage, I see it saying the opposite of what you are arguing here. Paul's comments about speaking into the air lead up to his explanation that speaking sensible words in a perfectly valid language to someone who does not understand it causes you to be a 'barbarian' to that person.
This is the only reference to 'gibberish' I can see in the passage. It is believe that 'barbarian' comes from the idea that foreigners said 'bar bar bar bar'-- they babbled. The non-Greek speakers (and perhaps in Paul's idea, non-Jew, non-Greco-Romans) were 'barbarians.' But barbarians spoke real languages. They were Barbarians to Greeks who did not understand the languages.
Otherwise, I see absolutely nothing in the passage to indicate that Paul is calling speaking in tongues gibberish. In fact, why would Paul use the word 'glossolalia' if he were talking about gibberish? Why would he use a word that means speaking in a foreign language if he were talking about babbling. It doesn't make sense.
** Paul explained in 1 Cor. 12 that having a gift that puts you in the spot light is not better then other gifts.***
Paul doesn't say that one gift is not better than other gifts, but he does say that the feeble parts are 'necessary.'
**In the Corinth church, as happens to this day, speaking in tongues, has a value and those who do it feel better about themselves because they do it. Paul told the Corinthians to stop trying to be "showy" and love others.**
I think you are reading into the text. Paul says that if he spoke in tongues but did not have love he would be as a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbol. Does that mean Paul is rebuking the Corinthians for being 'showy?' I do not see how this leap in your reasoning is supported by the text.
I do not see anywhere in I Corinthians 14 where Paul tells the Corinthians that their motivation for speaking in tongues is to be showy, attract attention, or to make themselves feel better about themselves. If you can show me any of these things in the text, please go ahead.
Paul does attribute their behavior to a lack of understanding.
I Corinthians 14:20. Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.**
Maybe the Corinthians thought that if they spoke in tongues without interpretation, something spiritual and supernatural was happening. Or maybe they just didn't give it any thought and just spoke in tongues without interpretation in the meeting. Paul does not tell us that their childish understanding had anything to do with being showy. It is not fair to the Corinthians to read these ideas into the text. Apparently, at least some the Corinthians were ignorant and needed teaching to understand the principles behind an edifying church meeting, and that is what Paul provides in the passage.
Nowhere does Paul question the validity of the Corinthian's gift of tongues, or indicate that it is not real. If you can show me evidence to the contrary, please go right ahead.
** He went on to rebuke and show them that Tongues were not what they thought and many of them who thought they had the gift did not.**
What version of the Bible are you reading? I have a KJV, NIV, NKJV, and none of them have any verses that say this. What verses are you talking about?
**That is why he includes what tongues really were, a sign to unbelieving Jews, so they would understand they did not have to try to have something they did not have. ***
The passage says that tongues are for a sign to unbelievers, but does not mention 'unbelieving Jews.' But this has absolutely nothing to do with the idea that the Corinthian's gift of tongues was fake.
***Spiritial Gifts truely are "gifts". They are a present given from God to us. If I give you a car but not the keys the gift is of no value. If I give you a car and the keys and say this is your car it is a real gift. You will then decide when and where you go in YOUR CAR. God fully gave us our gifts and we decide when and where to use them. This is seen the easiest in the teaching/preaching gift. I have never seen a preacher get up to deliver a message and say they can't speak because God didn't power their gift today. No, the gift to preach is in the preacher and they can use it whenever they want.***
Spiritual gifts are 'charismata'. They are manifestations of God's grace. Do we use them as we will without any limitations? No, of course not.
If the gift of teaching had no limitations, then a teacher could teach on anything. Imagine you have the gift of teaching, and you are invited to speak at a church. When you arrive, they tell you, "Oh, yes, since you have the gift of teaching, please teach us about the following topic: We want to know all about the Kenites." If you haven't studied about the Kenites, and you don't have a concordance, or other tools, you might not be able to teach on this topic. If you are asked to explain the symbolism of the parts of the tabernacle, or certain Old Testament rituals, you may need to have some understanding from the Spirit before you can adequately teach these things. The gift of teaching is limited by the knowledge of the teacher.
If someone has the gift of prophecy, can he just prophesy anything he wants to, and make it come to pass? Could Agabus have just decided he wanted there to be an earthquake, and prophesied it into being? Could he just make God say something God didn't want to say, and share this message from God? True prophets using the true gift of prophecy relate messages that God gives them. They can't just will up a message and still be using the true gift.
Philip was translated. Does that mean he owned this as a gift, and he never had to walk or ride a camel ever again? Paul worked a miracle. Why didn't he just translate himself out of prison, or make the bars fly off of the jail cell? Instead of going hungry, why didn't he just turn stones into bread?
The gifts of the Spirit need to be used according to the will of God.
*** Self use would pervert the gift. For example we know that Paul had a "thorn", probably very bad eye problems, anyway, he had the gift of healing and miracles as he healed regularly and even raised the dead. He could have healed himself, he had the power within to do that but he chose not to. All he did is what we do now and that is appeal to God to remove our burden. God did not choose to heal Paul but Paul could have healed himself. He would not though because he understood more then anybody that gifts were used to edify the body only and not to edify individuals.***
First of all, there is no reason from the context to think that Paul's thorn in the flesh was sickness. The context is about Paul's suffering, and the thorn is a messenger/angel from Satan. The thorn may have been a human messenger of Satan, like one of the false apostles mentioned earlier in the chapter, who might have stirred up persecution against him. Or it might have been a demon spirit that stirred up persecution.
You brought up Paul's sickness. This is actually one of the best arguments against your view of gifts of the Spirit. Many scholars now believe that Galatia was south Galatia, an area reached on Paul and Barnabas' first missionary journey. The Galatians apparently were familiar enough with Barnabas for Paul to mention him to them. According to Galatians 5:13, Paul and Barnabas were both miracle workers.
If miracles were automatically done by the apostles, at their own will, just like a superhero using his powers, why didn't Barnabas instantaneously heal Paul?
What we see in Acts is that the 12 apostles prayed for God to stretch out His hand to do signs and wonders. They had to pray for these things. They didn't just have complete control over it. There were times when God did a lot of miracles through Paul, and Luke thought it important enough to mention that this was going on in Acts.
*** All Spiritual Gifts operate the same or we would be told otherwise in scripture. We can use our gifts at our will which makes it so important to understand gifts and to stay close to God and His people so you use your gift often and properly.***
I do not see where scripture teaches that all spiritual gifts operated 100% at the will of the person who operates in the gift. I see too many reasons to believe otherwise.
** Based on this if a tongue speaker had the gift of tongues they could speak any language they wanted at their will.***
I do not see anything in the Bible that would cause me to believe that. The gifts function the way they function. If the Bible doesn't specify they must function a certain way, who are we to say that they do.
No one can do that, so based on that I know the gift has passed away and thats without the rest of the Biblical proof that has been provided. When thought of in this light and as our responsibility, Spiritual gifts take on a much more important significance.
Well, ever thought of it like that? Most Christians, good well meaning Christians, don't but they should as it really is important but it is not a concept many teach in the churches today.
