Tongues

My experience with tongues has been watching it occur on television, specifically TBN. I have seen some of the preachers just break into some gibberish, and in not one instance did I ever see any interpretation by someone else.

They would just start, run on for a few seconds, then resume in English.

I have read of a couple of instances where someone actually understood the unknown tongue and knew it was a knowable foreign language. And, that the interpretation given by someone else was wrong. In another case, the tongue was recognized by someone as the filthiest kind of language.

If New Testament tongues are real today, they surely are being counterfeited a lot.

I had a pastor who said, get as excited as you want, jump as high as you want, just be speaking English when you come down.

 

I believe that believers can speak in languages that are unintelligable to those who do not have the gift of interpretation. In Acts 2, the disciples (both men and women) spoke in "other tongues" as the Spirit gave them utterance. Yet there were those in the crowd who belittled the disciples claiming they were "full of new wine" (drunk on cheap wine). Yet those who were open to the Spirit were hearing (interpreting?) their words in their native languages.

That being said, tongues in worship should be interpreted by another believer for the body, and the congregation should determine whether the interpretation is correct. Also, I believe there is something currently called a "private prayer language." I know one man who has told me he has that gift. It began at the time of his conversion over 60 years ago and has continued to this day. (The reason he mentioned it to our thelogy class at church is that a brief biographical sketch of his life was being published in an academic journal and the interviewer had specifically asked him about experiences like that. It really surprised me since this theologian is not the "emotional" sort and is highly sophisticated and conservative in his theology. He is also a seminary professor.

I do not have the gift of tongues, nor do I apparently have the gift of interpretation, but I have seen both exercised in a biblical manner.

 

I definitely agree.

The Spirit gives utterance, not a preacher or teacher who teaches a person how to do it.

 

I think we've all heard those stories. While he may exposed a problem in the congregation, he was also guilty of pretending to have an utterance from the Lord.

I sometimes wonder if God gives unbelievers exactly what they expect to get because they are nor truly willing to have faith. Now I think that this incident likely demonstrated that there was no valid interpretation going on, but I have the sense that this sort of thing is not very respectful to God. It is up to the congregation to determine whether or not the interpretation is valid. There may be a lack of the exercised gift of discernment in that body.

 

Since the unknown tongue is to God (1 Corinthians 14:2), then any interpretation that says "Thus saith the Lord God of Hosts..." or "My Child, ..." is a phony interpretation.

Since the unknown tongue is to God, the interpretation thereof must also be to God or it is not a proper interpretation.

 

I think you are correct when you identify the tongues of 14:2 are tongues spoken to God (prayer language?) that doesn't need to be interpreted. However, 1 Corinthians 14:26-28 seems to identify a type of tongues for the edification of the body of Christ. That type clearly involves interpretation.

God doesn't need a human being to interpret what the Spirit inspires.

 

1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

The unknown tongue, as pointed out before, is to God. Paul goes on to say that unknown tongue is to be interpreted... otherwise, it brings interpretation.

The verses you gave, 26 -28 also are speaking of the unknown tongue...

1 Corinthians 14:26-28 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. 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. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

That unknown tongue is to God, not to man. It is to be interpreted as to God, not to man... even though, when interpreted correctly, all are edified.

God man not need an interpreter, but the human who speaks in an unknown tongue must have the ability to interpret or have an interpreter with him... else he is to keep silent.

 

Biblical tongues is not gibberish. At Pentecost, in Acts 2 everybody understood what was spoken:

Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

Acts 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

Acts 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

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.

The gift of tongues were a sign, not for the believer, but for the unbeliever:

1 Corinthians 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

Biblical tongues are definitely NOT the gibberish you hear today! There was nobody sitting around in a circle "asking for the gift of tongues" or "for the baptism of the Holy Spirit". Jesus told the apostles that they would receive "the promise of the Father" and that they would be "baptized with the Holy Ghost":

Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power..

Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

The apostles KNEW that they would receive power---power to be witnesses unto Christ "both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

 

Certanly, what is being touted as tongues today are not biblical. I was in the Pentacostal Movement for17 years, before I was delivered from that nonsense.

 

What does tongues have to do with wearing bow ties?

 

Please help me out. I don't get what is being discussed here.
i missed the humor and don't understand what bowties have to do with this subject.
Maybe i am slow I just don't get it

 

When one speaks in the so-called tongues, it almost always sounds like

see me tie my bowtie or
untie my bowtie or
who stole my honda or
who stole my hundai

Unless one is a certain member of a Church at which my mother attends whenever she goes to NC.

Then you hear

Paw, Paw Paw, Paw, Paw Paw Paw,...

 

I have heard lots of people speak in tongues and i speak in tongues but I have never heard those sounds. But since When a person speaks in tongues they are speaking to God so that is between them and God.

 

If there are no interpreters, they are to keep silence. It is obvious from the interpretations given that they have no interpreter.