1 Corinthians 12-14

Hey, again~Brian, I don't ALWAYS have a great attitude nor am I always kind, but thanks for thinking so!
I was really naive that I was never concerned by those who preached another gospel until it touched my family and now I could kick myself for never learning more about it; so I do tend to lose my cool from time to time. Sorry.

I think back then, the apostles were given supernatural gifts which ended when they died. I do not know how else to explain what I mean other than if one of them touched someone, they were healed. If one foretold something it happened. I think God had to give that BECAUSE they did not have what we do today-His Word. They needed all that "proof" to prove Who God was, because they didn't have the "proof" we have today. They had some, but not all. We have the whole enchilada!
Just this morning, Brian, I opened my KJBible, & read something & thought, "I have come face to face with myself"!

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by DHK:

As for the women they were not permitted to speak in tongues at all.
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
DHK

Hmmm...DHK, if women weren't permitted to speak
in tongues at all, why do you suppose that that they spoke in tongues on the Day of Pentecost? Acts 1:14) These all continued with
one accord in prayer and supplication, with the
women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.

The women were in the upper room, among the 120, when the Holy Ghost was poured out for the first time. They spoke in tongues! Why weren't the
other women allowed to speak in tongues? Or, better than that, doesn't a woman have the right to have the baptism of the Holy Ghost today?

MEE

 

See my above post MEE. This only goes to show how far astray your false doctrine has gone. The church did not start until Pentecost had come. The instructions were to the local church. The occurence at Pentecost was a one time event in history, never to be repeated again. Take your doctrine from the epistles MEE. Why do you fail to do that? You base your doctrine not on Scripture, but on experience and verses pulled out of context from the Book of Acts. Prove your doctrine to me from the epistles such as the book of Romans, or in this case the Pastoral epistles.
DHK

 

posted July 10, 2002 08:53 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apostolic Doctine - Speaking in Tongues
... History also proves that speaking in tongues was the evidence of the Holy Spirit
baptism in the early church, and has not ceased to be a Biblical experience ...
www.altupc.com/articles/tongues1.htm - 35k - Cached - Similar pages

For all of those who missed this link. Hope it sheds some light on the subject of speaking in tongues.

MEE

 

Naomi, you have taken most of these Scriptures and made them mean something that they were not intended to mean. In verses 7 to 13, you mostly ignore, except to make a very generalized statement that God is speaking about order in the church. Look at what God is really talking about:

7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
---Even inanimate objects as musical instrument give distinct sounds which cannot be confused one with another. With tongues there is nothing but confusion. Don't use tongues. It causes confusion. In an orchestra every instrument (pipe or flute, harp, etc.) has a distinct sound. All put together they produce beautiful music which we can understand. If they are all out of tune or out of sync with each other, they just produce chaos, and no one can understand. So it is with tongues. You don't have interpreters, there is no edification or understanding, just confusion and chaos. Avoid speaking in tongues. That was his message in verse 7.

8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
---The trumpet was an important instrument. It sounded the troupes together. It told them to advance, to retreat. It played the reveille. It told them when to awake, when meal time was. It had a "certain" sound for each activity. I am not so musically talented. You would NOT want me to be the trumpeter or bugler in your army. What would happen? If I did it, your army would not know whether to advance or retreat, go to bed or arise, or what to do. There would be just utter confusion. A trumpet must give a certain sound, for if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself for battle? The trumpet needs to be understood. Tongues are not understood. They are not profitable. They do not edify. Avoid them. Do not speak in tongues. That was Paul's message here.

9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
--As if the two illustrations were not enough, he applies them directly. "So Likewise," he says. Unless you speak with your own tongue (that organ you possess) words that one can easily understand, what profit is it?? There is no profit in speaking in a language that no one can understand. Don' do it. It is just like speaking in the air (Is that the origin of the word "airhead?). Speak to the wind. Might as well. No one can understand you anyway if you speak in tongues. Don't do it.

10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
---There are many kinds of voices. He is referring again to languages. They all have their significance in this world. They are all important.

11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
---But if I don't know what language he is speaking, and I speak in another language that he does not understand, I will seem as a barbarian, and vice-versa. There won't be any meaningful communication. Don't speak in tongues--there is no understanding in tongues. Over and over again he tells the Corinthians that they ought not to be seeking this gift, but staying away from it. It is not profitable for them.
More later.
DHK

 

Hmmm...DHK, if women weren't permitted to speak
in tongues at all, why do you suppose that that they spoke in tongues on the Day of Pentecost? Acts 1:14) These all continued with
one accord in prayer and supplication, with the
women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.The women were in the upper room, among the 120, when the Holy Ghost was poured out for the first time. They spoke in tongues! [MEE]

MEE~Unlike some Baptists, I personally believe that the church began BEFORE the day of Pentecost; because prior to that day, there was already a body of baptized believers covenanted together to carry out the commands of Jesus Christ & unto them, those 3,000 non-tongue-talking souls were "ADDED".

I think I've mentioned to you before that I don't believe Mary spoke in tongues. I don't think God would say one thing about women & do another. I may be wrong, but I don't think women were even allowed to mix or associate with men in the Jewish temple or even in the synagogue. I think Acts 1:26 tells who the "they" are in Acts 2:1. In Acts 2:43b, these things are done through the Apostles only-nothing is said about the 120 or the new converts speaking in languages. I think all of Acts 2 (look at v.14) is the 12 only. If the 120 were doing signs & wonders, why did the crowd just address the 12?(v.13). Why does v.5 say devout men? v.6 says every man; so does v.8, & v.22 says ye men, v.45-men/every man... "oh, well, what do I know anyhow?"

[ July 10, 2002, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: GrannyGumbo ]

 

12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
---The Corinthian church had all the gifts. Paul told them that they come behind in no gift. But he specifically says here to seek to EDIFY the church. Tongues did not do that. Don't speak in tongues because they don't edify; no one understands them; they are not profitable. Rather seek prophecy; it will edify, and build up the church.

13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
This verse is connected to verse 12 by means of the word "wherefore." Thus the subject is edification and understanding, as it is throughout the whole chapter. If you are going to speak in another language you had better pray big time that you are also given the gift of interpretation at the same time. Because if you are not given it, I am just going to tell (a few verses later) to sit down and shut up!! In this case the speaker had to be able to speak in another language than his own, and then be able to interpret it.

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
--A misunderstood verse indeed. Let's look at it this way: "If I pray in another language that I do not understand, my spirit may also pray (I can understand my spirit praying), but my understanding (of the other language) is unfruitful. I have been to a service where people spoke in tongues. My understanding of their gibberish was completely fruitless and futile. It was mayhem and confusion. I have also been on the mission field in a meeting where everyone but me spoke another language. It was a real language, just not mine (English). My understanding of the service (both prayer and message) was fruitless). But, I could still pray in my spirit and understand in my spirit. My spirit prays. But my understanding (of the other language) is unfruitful. Therefore, Paul says, Don't speak in tongues. It is not profitable. It does not edify. It does not bring understanding.

15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
What is it then? What is the best thing to do? What shall I do. I will pray with my spirit, and I will pray with understanding. I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with understanding. Note the emphasis on understanding all throughout. Everything that Paul does he does with understanding. He wants the church to be built up, edified. He wants them to understand. Speaking in tongues is fruitless; it brings no understanding.

16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
---Basically what Paul has just done in the last three verses is use three illustrations to prove the fruitlessness of speaking in tongues. He uses the illustration of public prayer (that done in a church service), public singing (context is church), and now giving thanks publicly for a meal. In all three cases if one was to do by the use of tongues or using another language, he would be very foolish, and would look very foolish. He would pray and given thanks, and the people would not know when to say "Amen." He said, You may have prayed very well, but what use or benefit is it if no one understands or is edified. Therefore, don't speak in tongues.

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
Why did he say that? Because these were carnal and immature Christians who were still seeking after a sign, just like Charismatics are today. It is a rebuke to them.

1Cor.3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

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.
---You completely twisted the meaning of this verse around. The terse rebuke in this verse is very plain. He would rather say: "Hello, my name is Paul." That is 5 words that people can understand than 10,000 words in an unknown language that people cannot understand. What is he saying here. 5 to 10,000. He is saying that speaking with understanding is 2000 times more important than speaking in tongues. 2000 times more important. 2000 per cent better. That makes tongues pretty insignificant doesn't it. Don't seek after tongues. Seek to edify people, to cause them to understand the Word. Tongues simply causes confusion and chaos, avoid them. Paul was telling them to avoid them in his day. Now the gift has ceased. How much more should we avoid that which now has a probable demonic source.
DHK

 

Thanks DHK, Great posts. I can't even think of anything to add.

Granny and MEE, DHK is right about Pentecost, it was a one time special event and should not be confused with the normal workings of the gathered assembly.

God Bless,
Brian

 

Brian, could it be that you
can't add anything is because you only know what DHK tells everyone on this board? He "lords" this forum and you all follow after "what" you know not.

I read all of his posts and most of them I don't even bother to respond. They are pathetic, to say the least. Go ahead and follow what he has to
say, it will make you like him. God forbid! IMO, I think he is scared of what he says about the Spirit of God. When he says things like probable and possibly of a demonic nature, referring to speaking in tongues, this shows that he is not sure of what he is teaching.

He doesn't understand that there is a difference in receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues, and the "gift of tongues," but then neither do most of you.

I have never heard of anyone that seeks for the Holy Ghost and receives it for the "first" time call the Spirit of God, "the gift of tongues."

MEE

[ July 11, 2002, 11:27 AM: Message edited by: MEE ]

 

Hi MEE, Believe it or not DHK and I disagree on some aspects of spiritual gifts. We do agree all the way on "tongues" and that is what i was applauding him for. I think it is important that we all study God's word ourself first and learn from eachother second. I am always sorry to hear when Christians, usually really good well meaning people, disagree on certain issues because it shows the world that we are not truely of "one accord". The diversirties amoung those on the BB in regards to salvation alone amaze me. Many on this board would say I am not going to Heaven because I haven't been believer baptized. Some say i am OK as long as i believe now and was Baptized as an infant. Our differences will continue until we are with Jesus in eternity. The issue of Tongues will be done away with once and for all. Until then I must share what I see scripture saying and DHK will do the same. MEE you also share what you think is right. I really believe your theology is not sound, you I think feel that I just have not "arrived" yet. Either way keep studying God's word and leave the emotional part of your Christian walk for worshiping time and for showing compassion toward others and try to study God's word with logic and practicalness(? is that a word).

In Christian Love,
Brian

 

Brian,
First, I went to great lengths to show that the context is clearly revelation. It speaks of the revelatory gifts: prophecy, tongues, revelatory knowledge. Paul sets them in contrast to semi-permanent gifts which will pass away at the Coming of Christ: Faith and hope. But it is love that will never pass away, it is the greatest of all. The temporary gifts are revelatory gifts which will pass when the revelation is complete, the perfected Word of God (Psalm 19:7; James 1:25).
Now let's look at the rest of the verses that I have not explained, as you requested.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

When I was a child (an immature Christian), I spake as a child (i.e., I spoke with other tongues).
I understood as a child--referring to the gift of prophecy.
I thought as a child--referring to the gift of knowledge or special revelation.

But when I became a man (more mature in the Lord), I put away childish things. That is, as I grew older in the Lord, I had no more need for these revelatory gifts. More and more of the Word was being written. These gifts were dying out. The people seeking these gifts were really immature Christians, as Paul refers to the Corinthians in 1Cor.3:1-3, that they were carnal and immature.

For now we see through a glass (mirror) darkly; but then face to face. That mirror will so shine that it will show my true face: thus face to face.
I know in part. I have only part of the revelation of the Word of God. Remember the context is revelation.
But then (when? When the Word of God will be completed), shall I be known even as also I am known. When I look into God's Word today, it exposes who I really am. In Paul's day it did that in part--he had the Old Testament. How much more does it do that today, with the inclusion of the New Testament to make up the completed Word of God. Look at the parallel Scripture in James 1:

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
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.
---If you but hear the Word and do not obey the Word, James says you are like a man who gets up in the morning, looks in the mirror and then goes away, and can't remember whether or not he needed to shave or comb his hair, or wash the grime of his face. The experience of some teens (both boys and girls) can tell you that the longer you look in that mirror the more you'll find wrong with the face staring back at you. What's worse is the brighter the light, the more dirt you find. This is the picture that both Paul and James are drawing. We see through a mirror darkly. The light isn't very good. I don't get a good reflection. I can't see all the defects. But then, when the perfect is come, "whoso looks into the perfect law of liberty, and continues therein, he being not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed." He looks into that bright shining Book, the completed Word of God, and he sees himself and all of his imperfections. He doesn't forget. He does something about it. He gets those blemishes and imperfections taken care of. This man shall be blessed in his deed. Paul never lived to see the completed Word of God, but he looked forward to the day that he could.
DHK

[ July 12, 2002, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: DHK ]