1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

need verses about talking in tongues is not biblical in this generation

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by chickenlady, Aug 2, 2005.

  1. chickenlady

    chickenlady New Member

    Feb 6, 2005
    Likes Received:
    Does somebody have a collection of supporting verses? or info? A friend asked me for them. Thank you!
  2. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Mar 31, 2005
    Likes Received:
    You won't find them, because there aren't any.
  3. yeshua4me2

    yeshua4me2 New Member

    Jul 6, 2005
    Likes Received:
    the only help i can give is that the word for tongues in greek is dilectos which can only mean 3 things: a literal tongue, something that looks like a tongue, or a KNOWN dialect or KNOWN language, not a magical non-sense speek.

    when the bible says they spoke in unknown tongues, it is say that the ones speaking did not know the lang they were heard in. the vain babbelings done in many WOF churches is not scriptural., and are very often used to show forth their authority in the church. i have heard paula white (vain babbler) use tongues as a sign that her extra-biblical teachings are from God.

    there are plenty of books with solid reason for them not being in use today.

    thankyou and God Bless
  4. Rachel

    Rachel New Member

    Oct 3, 2004
    Likes Received:
  5. chickenlady

    I did a COMPLETE study 14 years ago on this very subject. It is an 8 page study which also included " A private Prayer Language "
    Anyway I do not have it on computer to copy and send, hopefully I will some day since it is the most complete study I have ever seen on this subject. When I did the study it was done not to prove tongues wasn't for today but to show all the scripture verses that delt with the subject and what the Bible had to say about it. After looking at both sides of the subject and doing the study I came away 99% sure What is happening in most churches today regarding this " So called gift " isn't true Biblical tongues mentioned in the Bible, here is a brief study why.

    To Sumerize this is what I came up with

    Tongues were a SIGN to Unbelievers not Believers
    ( 1 Cor. 14:22 )
    The Jews required SIGNS a SIGN was given them
    I listed 8 verses showing proof of TONGUES being a SIGN Gift. 1 Cor. 14:22, Acts 2:22, Acts 2:12-36, 1 Cor. 1:22, Heb. 2:3-4, Acts 2:2-4, Acts 1:8.

    TONGUES will cease ( 1Cor. 13:8 ) The word cease means in the Greek ( Stop and never start again )
    The reason Tongues ceased was because they were no longer needed, the Holy Spirit ceased to give us revelation through the Apostles, also Tongues were for the unbelieving Jews to show them this person the " Apostles " was indeed speaking for and from God. We need no other revelation today since we have Gods word the Bible, that is all we need to reveal Gods truth.

    The true gift of Tongues was a KNOWN language
    ( Acts 2:6 and 2:8-11 )
    At Pentecost the Spirit enabled the disciples to speak in a REAL DIALECT ( Language ) previously unknown to the speaker. Acts 2:5-11

    I list many verses which show a proper Order for the use of the true gift of tongues.
    1 Cor.14:26, 1 Cor. 12:10-28, 1 Cor:12:30, 1 Cor. 12:13-31, 1 Cor. 14:1-4, 1 Cor. 12:13-30, 1 Cor. 14:28, 1 Cor. 1 Cor.14:34, 1 Tim. 11-14, 1 Cor. 14:40, 1 Cor. 14:13-19, 1 Cor. 14:7-12, 1 Cor. 14:23, 1 Cor. 14.33. 1 Cor. 14:6-12,

    If this is not practiced scriptually in the churches today then I would say what is happening isn't the true gift but a conterfiet.
    2 Thess. 2:9 Satan can imitate and will come with great powers and SIGNS and lying wonders

    Page 5: EXPLANATION OF CURRENT TONGUE MOVEMENT PHEONENON ( Some realistic possibilities )

    1) Demonic Influences: More explained about that in study.

    2) Learned behavior: More about that in study

    3) Deliberate inducement of tongues: More about that in the study.

    Page 6 and 7 all about private prayer language. and Page 8 conclusion.

    Hope this helps.
  6. chickenlady

    chickenlady New Member

    Feb 6, 2005
    Likes Received:
    Thank you! YOU ROCK! I'd love to get the full copy of that paper sometime.
  7. Pete

    Pete New Member

    Aug 31, 2002
    Likes Received:
    I surfed across this page the other night. Most of it probably already covered in RightFromWrong's post [​IMG]
  8. Ok this is the best I could do on the Bible study I did on Tongues.CLICK on link below. Please excuse the grammar and spelling errors it was done when I was 25 and I need to redo it one of these days.
    I still do not have the best grammar and spelling LOL. Anyway hope this helps [​IMG]

  9. Dpiearcy

    Dpiearcy New Member

    Aug 3, 2005
    Likes Received:
    Hello all!

    Believe it or not, this is my first post here. I don't remember how I accidently stumbled across this board but I found this thread and decided to sign up.

    I like this thread. Why? Because so many have fallen into this trap lately. I've actually written a book on the subject (but won't tell you what it's called because I'm sure advertising is strictly forbidden.)

    I will be posting a detailed reply in this thread shortly. Interestingly enough, I happen to be teaching this subject in my Sunday school class the next 4 weeks. Needless to say, 4 weeks of teaching will not fit in one post.

    So, I need to summarize for you all.

    BTW, this is an important issue!

    I believe the Antichrist will speak in tongues. As you (probably) know, the Antichrist will be not only the leader of the world's political structure, but he will also be the leader of the world's church.

    What do ALL denomations currently have in common (including Baptist...sorry...I am one but it's true) that's right...tongues. We now have Catholics, Methodist, A variety of cults that speak in tongues.

    So...this is indeed a VERY important issue. If you are not well versed in what the Bible has to say (hint...tongues is only mentioned in 3 books of the Bible...Acts is a historic narrative...we don't get our doctrine from historic narratives or I would have lots of wives and some concubines to boot ((ie. Solomon)) we also have references in 1 Corinthians which is the a pastoral epistle (we DO get our doctrine from those books) and one other reference.

    As soon as I can summarize a book and 4 weeks of teaching into a single post...I'll put it here!

    Thanks for the awesome board!

    David Piearcy
  10. Dpiearcy

    I think you need to read my study on Tongues. If I understand you correctly you say that true biblical tongues ARE for today.

    If that is true how can you answer all the verses I gave showing why I believe 99% that they are not for today.
    Starting with the first one
    1 Cor. 14:22

    Page 4 deals with other cults and denominations speaking in " tongues "
  11. Dpiearcy

    Dpiearcy New Member

    Aug 3, 2005
    Likes Received:
    I'm sorry you misunderstood my post. I DO NOT believe tongues is for today. I re-read my post and can't see what I said that implied that.

    To the contrary. I believe tongues, like healing, was an apostalic sign gift that is no longer valid.

    But I DO believe Satan imitates what God has done (or is doing). That is why there are so many speaking in tongues today and will be in the future.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding but to be clear...I do NOT believe tongues is for today.

    David Piearcy
  12. chickenlady

    chickenlady New Member

    Feb 6, 2005
    Likes Received:
    All this info is great. The papers were awesome. Thanks to everybody for your help!
  13. Dpiearcy, I'm sorry I misunderstood.

    Please read my study and you will find it is very simple and organized in a way that makes for easy read and complete understanding for anyone. It is very hard to read and completely understand many studies when it goes on and on. I find I lose interest and have a hard time putting it all together. In all the studies I do I try to keep it simple and just let scripture speak for itself.

    I didn't write the study in a way that tried to prove Tongues were for today or that they were not, my conclusion page 8 explains all that. Anyway, it was done in a way that shows ALL the scriptures in the Bible that related to it.

    I noticed you are a Pastor I would be very interested to hear what you think about my study which I used very little in resourses ( mainly Gods word ) a few books and tapes dealing with both sides.The private prayer language came from insights from God.

    Any other thoughts would be appreciated as well.
  14. Dpiearcy

    Dpiearcy New Member

    Aug 3, 2005
    Likes Received:

    I actually took the time to read your study before posting a reply to your earlier message. You did a very good job of letting Scripture speak for itself.

    I agree with your understanding of a private prayer language. No place in Scripture is this ever mentioned. As a matter of fact, the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray. How did He respond? "Our Father who art in heaven...etc."

    The only verse charismatics use to defend private prayer language is Romans 8 "The Holy Spirit makes intercessions for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." How obvious is that? In the first place it is the Holy Spirit and He's making the intercession, and He's doing it with groanings that can't be uttered, not groanings that can be uttered! And it isn't us--it's Him! How can you ever convolute that? There isn't any Scripture to support it.



    As I stated before...I'll post a detailed message in this thread when I have time (it's looking like Monday now).

    Since I'm speaking of it...I might as well post a few thought now. :)

    Tongues is only mentioned in Mark 16:17 (and that verse points to a fulfillment in Acts 2), the book of Acts (which I've previously stated is an historic narrative and we don't determine doctrine by an historic narrative...but I agree with you concerning the purpose of tongues or who tongues was intended...unbelieving Jews), and 1 Corinthians.

    Now...ask youself this question:

    Why did Paul address this issue in the Corinthian church? After asking yourself that question, read chapter 12 and 13. (BTW, the verse 3 verses are hyperbole...IF I could then...read it and you'll see what I mean). That brings us to chapter 14. I wouldn't call chapter 14 a glowing recommendation for speaking in tongues. On the contrary. Paul is CONDEMNING the Corinthian church for their wanting to be edified (they were getting drunk in communion for crying out loud!)

    Then, as you read chapter 14, remember, the KJV translators added the word "unknown".

    Should we get into the Greek?

    The word in Acts 2 is "glossa" (Gk.) and it means language. They were hearing people speak in their own language. That's all, it wasn't some angel talk, some gibberish, some gobbledygook, some nonsense talk. And then it says also they were hearing in their own "dialektos" (Gk.)--dialects. That also we find used in Acts chapter 2.

    True, what we see today was probably what Paul was addressing in the Corinthian church.

    They were going so far as to speak in tongues and while in their trance "of the spirit" they were cursing Christ (see chapter 12). Is that of God? So the tongues they were practicing was probably not ALL real. Considering the fact that the REAL tongues was still in use at the time (see chapter 13...uh...if you want to know what "perfect" means I'll cover that later) Paul had to distinguish between the two.

    There is an interesting footnote to that, that you can look through carefully. Notice the plural and singular usages of the word language, and that's helpful. I believe when he uses the singular of "glossa" he's referring to the false gibberish, and when he uses the plural he's referring to languages, because you can't have plural gibberishes. There aren't kinds of double talk and gobbledygook and gibberish--there's only gibberish. It doesn't have a plural. But that is something you can study in the commentary and examine on your own.

    Now, I've got to get back to my studies..that is..before I get into verses 34-35 of chapter 14 where women should keep silence in the church and if they have any questions...wait until they get home and then ask their husband! :)

    Before I go...ask yourself this question...why did Paul (guided by inspiration of the Holy Spirit) tell the women to keep their mouth shut?

    Who started the modern charismatic movement? And where was it started? In church?

    If you study history I think you will very surprised.

    Adam sinned willfully. Eve was decieved. enough said. :) Sorry ladies!

    David Piearcy
  15. Thanks, but I see you are again just repeating everything I have already put in my study.

    Are you sure you really read it ?

    Maybe it would help if the actual verses were looked up. But you are basically saying the same things I did.
  16. yeshua4me2

    yeshua4me2 New Member

    Jul 6, 2005
    Likes Received:
    when i hear mondern tongues i think of Jodie Foster in that movie "Nell"........teeee ina winnn.....hahahahahhahaha

    my friend was a missionary in Tialand a while back, he got saved sold everything and became a missionary to Tialand....he did not know how to speak what ever it is they speak, but after three days of hitchhicking up into the mountians he say his ear just began to understand and his tongue was "untied" and he could speak, every dialect he came across for 2 years while in laos as well.....i believe him......if tongues exists today this is what it is.

    anyway thankyou and God Bless
  17. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Mar 31, 2005
    Likes Received:
    That is exactly how I believe tongues is used today. If I were in Mexico, and God wants me to speak to someone in Spanish, and there is nobody else there with me, I believe God would let me give him the gospel in his tongue supernaturally.

    I do not believe tongues in the church are still used today, for the reasons stated here: it is for unbelievers.
  18. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Jul 13, 2000
    Likes Received:
    The first thing to remember is that the tongues of the Bible were always real foreign langauges. This is easily demonstrated in Acts 2 where tongues and languages are used interchangeably. "How hear we every man in our own "tongue" (language)? There were at least 13 language groups that were present on the Day of Pentecost. All heard the Apostles in their own language, and yet the gift was not in the hearing but in the speaking. It was the gift of tongues, not of hearing. Different ones were speaking different languages, up until the time that Peter raised his voice and began to preach.

    Secondly, note that tongues was not considered by Paul as an important gift.

    1 Corinthians 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.
    --Here you have most of the gifts listed in order of importance. Notice the adverbs: "First, Secondarily, thirdly, after that, then." What is at the very end of the list? Diversities of tongues. Tongues is put at the end of the list because it is the least of all of these gifts. It was least in importance, for all these gifts were listed in importance as the defining adverbs show.

    1 Corinthians 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
    --This is a rhetorical question with an automatic answer of: No! Not all have the same gift, nor are all to seek the same gift. We are never commanded to seek the gift of tongues. It is either given to the believer or it isn't. There is no command anywhere to seek for the gift of tongues.

    1 Corinthians 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
    --Covet or desire earnestly the best gifts (like prophecy or teaching), not tongues. Tongues was on the bottom of the list. It was the least of all the gifts. Why would one disobey this command and desire to have the least of all the gifts, when Paul explicitly says to desire the better gifts which he puts at the top of the list in verse 28?

    He then goes on to say: "Yet I show you a more excellent way," and writes a most beautiful chapter in 1Cor.13:1-7 about love. In essence he says here that better than all the spiritual gifts put together is love. Better than seeking after the spiritual gifts, seek after love. Divine loves trumps all the spiritual gifts.

    In 1Cor.13:8 Paul comes back to the subject of Spiritual gifts, this time concentrating specifically on those gifts which deal with revelation--God's revelation to mankind.

    1 Corinthians 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
    --There are three classes of gifts that Paul contrasts one with another: Permanent, Semi-permanent, and temporary.
    There is only one permanent gift. That one permanent gift is love (charity). It will never fail, but go on into eternity. The last verse of the chapter says: "but the greatest of these is "love." Love is the greatest gift. It is greatest because it is the only gift that will last forever.
    There are two gifts that are semi-permanent:

    1 Corinthians 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
    --These gifts abide right now: love, faith and hope. Love will go on forever, but when will faith and hope end?
    "We walk by faith and not by sight"
    When Jesus appears we will have no need of faith for we shall see him as he is. There will be no need of faith. Faith will end at the coming of Christ, when we see Jesus.

    Likewise hope:
    Romans 8:24-25 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
    --"What a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?" He doesn't. When we see Jesus we no longer need hope. He is our hope. When he appears hope will be gone.
    Thus these two: faith and hope, will cease to be at the coming of Christ.

    Then there are three temporary gifts mentioned in verse 8: prophecy, tongues, and (revelatory) knowledge. All three will "fail," "cease," "vanish away." The question of course is when? Remember the context. Context is key. The context is revelation. It is the revelation of God's Word to mankind from 13:8 all the way to the end of chapter 14. Thus we cannot take these verses out of their context.

    1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
    New Testament believers knew in part. They had part of the Bible--primarily the Old Testament. Perhaps some of them might have access to the Book of James or the Gospel of Matthew, two of the earlier written books. But they were not widespread. They knew in part. They had the OT, but not the NT. "And we prophecy in part." The reason for prophecy, as well as the other two fore-mentioned gifts (tongues and revelatory knowledge) were to give to the church the needed knowledge that these believers did not have and would not have access to, until the NT would be complete at the end of the first century. God gave them the means to have NT revelation before the Bible was completed.

    1 Corinthians 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
    --"When that which is perfect" is come. This phrase, especially the word "perfect" (teleios) is in the neuter gender, and thus cannot refer to Jesus Christ, but must refer to something that is neuter. It, in the context of revelation, refers to the completed Word of God, the Bible. The Old English work "perfect" is used in the sense of "complete." The Greek word "teleios" has the same meaning. It is not that the word means sinless. It does not. It means complete. The Bible was complete at the end of the first century and these gifts ceased at that time also. History also bears this out. The modern tongues movement did not start until the beginning of the twentieth century. Before that there were no tongues. History is silent concerning tongues for 1800 years. Then, BANG, the modern tongues movement began, and they all think it is Scriptural. I think not!

    In chapter 14, virtually every verse is a rebuke to the use of tongues. I don't understand how one can read that chapter through and say that tongues is for today. Every verse tells us that tongues is not for today, is a gift that is better not used.
    Perhaps I will post that in another post. This one is getting long.
  19. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Jul 13, 2000
    Likes Received:
    1 Corinthians 14:1-5 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
    1. Follow after love. Love is the most important thing. It is greater than all the spiritual gifts.
    2. Desire spiritual gifts. To put this in context, the spiritual gifts were for the first century when they were most needed. Today we have the Word of God. We do not need the supernatural gifts of the first century. God does not gift those gifts today. Sometimes Satan imitates them. But they are not of God. They have ceased.
    Another thing to keep in mind is that every gift, including and especially tongues, was given to the church. Paul was writing to the Corinthian church. They were for the edification of the church. None of these gifts were for use outside of the local church.
    "Rather that ye may prophesy." He is saying: Desire spiritual gifts, but out of them all, desire the gift of prophecy (not tongues), for the gift of prophecy is the most profitable.

    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.
    --The word "unknown" is not in the Greek. It is in italics.
    The word "tongues" means language. Thus, He that speaks in 'anothe' language speaks not unto men, but unto God. If I came to your church, and God had given me the gift to speak Cree, how many of you would understand it. I would (if I had the gift of interpretation as well), and God would. But you wouldn't.
    "No man understandeth him." That would be obvious.
    What I would be speaking would be a gift from God, spoken by the Spirit of God, since it is a spiritual gift, but a total mystery to you. Thus it does not edify you. It has no value whatsoever. Therefore, Paul is saying, Don't do it! The verse doesn't advocate praying in a private prayer language. None of these verses do. It is a rebuke. Don't speak in tongues where there is no understanding. It is wrong, because there is no understanding, no edification. Tongues is not a selfish gift for the use of one individual. It is always for the edification of the entire church.

    3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
    --But look at the gift of prophecy. The one that prophesies speaks unto men, and edifies them. He exhorst them and comforts them. What a useful gift that is. Therefore it is a gift to be desired. It is very much like preaching.

    4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
    --If God has given you the ability to speak in a foreign language, and you understand it, you might edify yourself, but so what. That is all that will be edified--you, yourself, and nobody else. That is a selfish use of the gift, and unsciptural. But prophesying edifies the entire church, as a spiritual gift is intended to. Therefore it is being used as it was Scripturally intended.

    5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
    --In the first part of this verse, the word "rather" makes the statement a bit ambiguous.
    Young's translation puts it this way:

    "and I wish you all to speak with tongues, and more that ye may prophecy,"
    --It is not that Paul was entirely against tongues (when used in their proper context and within the restrictions that he lays out for them), but he still states that he would rather that they would prophecy than speak in tongues. He gives the reason why:
    "Greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. "
    1. The gift of prophecy is greater than the gift of tongues, unless there is an interpreter.
    2. Understanding is key. Interpretation will give understanding. Note also "that the church may receive edifying". Tongues was a gift for the local church and only for the local church. To be used it had to be understood by all that were present.

    1 Corinthians 14:6-10 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
    --The question is asked: What profit is there if Paul comes and speaks in tongues? The answer is none.
    But there is profit if he is able to give them revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or doctrine. All of these will edify and teach the believers. Tongues will profit them nothing.

    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?
    --Inanimate objects, like musical instruments, give sounds. Each instrument has its own sound, and the ear can distinguish between them. How does the ear distinguish between the different languages being spoken if there is no interpreter. It doesn't.

    8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
    --Even a trumpet makes various sounds of its own: a call to rise, a call to go forward, a call to retreat, etc. If you don't know what sound is for what action, how are you going to be prepared for the battle?

    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.
    --In the same way, unless you use your tongue to speak words that are easily understood, who is going to understand them? It is as if you are speaking into the air; no one understands when you speak in a language that no one understands. It benefits no one.

    10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
    --There are different kinds of voices, that is, languages and dialects, and they all have distinct meanings. Make sure you have the right audience with the language that God has given you.

    1 Corinthians 14:11-14 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.
    --What a rebuke this is! If you speak in an unknown tongue without interpretation, Paul says, not only you are like a barbarian to him, but he (Paul) will be as a barbarian to him. There will be great insult on both sides. Thus speaking in tongues is not polite. It is rude and insulting.

    12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
    --Again go back to 1Cor.12:28 where the spiritual gifts are listed. Be zealous of spiritual gifts. But be zealous of the better ones, not the one that is listed at the bottom of the list, the one that is least important. Seek that which will edify the entire church.

    13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
    --In this context pray also for the gift of interpretation, a valuable gift for the one having the exact gift of interpretation for you may not always be available.

    14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
    --This is not condoning private prayer in tongues. It is carrying the thought forward from verse 13. If you pray without interpretation your understanding is unfuitful. But it doesn't say anything here about private prayer, does it? The gift is always for the church--public.

    1 Corinthians 14:15-20 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.
    --Praying with the spirit is not necessariy speaking in tongues. I pray with the spirit all the time. God forbid that I should not.
    However, given the benefit of the doubt, even if it does mean "in tongues" it would refer back to "praying for the gift of interpretation" so that you may have understanding. Understanding is key at all times in this chapter.
    Because I do, I know what I am saying, and the Lord brings to mind those that I should pray for.
    The hymns that I sing, I sing with understanding. It has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.

    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?
    --See how this is related to public prayer. If one gives thanks for the food in another language, no one will understand what is being said. He won't even know when the "Amen" is being said. There is no understanding is speaking in tongues.

    17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
    --The other is not edified. Those who you are speaking to are not edified just because you are proud and lifted up and want to show off your "spirituality" by your speaking in tongues. This was the problem at Corinth. But no one could understand them.

    18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
    --Paul gives thanks that he spoke in tongues more than them all, because they misused the gift. He had a genuine use for it on his missionary journeys.

    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.
    Paul would rather speak five words with understanding (Jesus loves me, I know), than 10,000 words in tongues (without understanding). What a contrast that is! Just five words. That is all. The comparison is almost unfathomable. It really puts tongues in its proper light. It is not the gift to desire.

    20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
    --Paul compares tongues to a childish gift. The more mature gifts were those of prophecy and teaching.
    They were being like little children in their seeking after the most immature of spiritual gifts, the least important. Get on with life! Grow up! Seek after the gifts that would do them the most good: prophecy, teaching.
  20. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Jul 13, 2000
    Likes Received:
    1 Corinthians 14:21-22 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
    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.

    These two verse go together. In verse 21 Paul quotes from Isaiah 28:11,12. The phrase: "I will speak unto this people, refers to the Jewish nation. In Acts 2 Peter directed his sermon to the very ones who had taken Christ and with their own wicked hands had crucified the Holy One.
    He was speaking to that generation, the first generation or the first century Jews. In this quote Paul says that this fulfillment has come true. Men from other nations, with other lips (languages) have spoken to the Jews, but yet they still rejected the Messiah. They still rejected the gospel. They still did not hear and obey the Word of the Lord. "And for all that the did not hear." They knew the OT. They knew about this prophecy. It was here now. Still they did not listen. Tongues were a sign to the Jew. This is one of the primary uses of tongues.

    Verse 22 says it is a sign not to the believer, but to the unbeliever. But the verse starts with the word "Wherefore," connecting it to verse 21. Thus the unbelievers mentioned here are specifically the unbelieving Jews of the first century. Tongues are a sign for the unbelieving Jews. The Bible says "The Jews require a sign." A sign was given them--the sign of tongues--and they rejected it. Judgement came in 70 A.D. with the destruction of Jerusalem and their Temple.
    Because of these two main reasons:
    1. The completion of the NT.
    2. Tongues being a sign to the unbelieving Jews of the first century,
    It is impossible for the gift of tongues to exist today, as the gift did in Biblical times. The Bible is complete. There are no first century Jews alive today, and certainly none in our churches.

    1 Corinthians 14:23-25 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
    --This situation describes the typical Charismatic church today. Many are speaking in gibberish (so-called tongues). One that is unfamiliar with tongues or even unsaved walks in. They think that they are all mad (crazy). It happens.

    24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
    --But God is a God of order. How much more will a visitor be impressed and learn of the truth of God, when edification is given through the gift of prophecy or teaching.

    25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
    --Thus the secrets of the heart made manifest. In other words, with good preaching the Holy Spirit does his work and convicts the heart of sin. He will get saved, and worship God as well. What a contrast to the one who will just come to the conclusion that you are all just crazy by seeing you all speak in tongues.

    1 Corinthians 14:26-33 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.
    --In this passage Paul addresses the problem of order and confusion in the church. Verse 26 indicates that many were coming in the church each one having something different: a psalm, a doctrine to be expounded, one speaking in tongues, a word of revelation, an interpreter.
    The rule was: All had to be done unto edification. There was not to be any confusion. It seems as if all came and started speaking at the same time. This of course would only lead to confusiohn.

    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.
    --Paul addresses the biggest problem first--that of tongues. The absolute most that could speak in tongues was three; "let it be by two, or at the most by three." And then another stipulation: They always had to speak turn by turn, never at the same time. Yet one more stipulation: There must be an interpreter. If there was no interpreter, he could not speak in tongues.

    29 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
    --Paul emphasizes this very strongly. In today's language he is saying: If you don't have an interpreter, then Shut up!!
    "Let him speak to himself and to God" The phrase simply means to pray (not necessarily speak in tongues). The very definition of prayer is speaking to God.

    30 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
    --The prophets had the same rule: two or three at the most could speak. The others would judge what they said: whether it was according to the Word of God or not (a good argument for sola scriptura).

    31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
    --In this way there would be order, and all would learn. Notice it was through prophecy that they learned (not tongues).

    32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
    --Again this demonstrates the words that a prophet spoke were subject to the other prophets, so that there were checks and balances. All had to be according to the Word of God, in other words.

    33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
    --There must be order in the church.

    1 Corinthians 14:34-40 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.
    --If the Charismatic churches followed these two verses today, the modern tongues movement would cease in no time at all [​IMG]
    Remember this is in the context of tongues. They were to keep silence in the church. It was not permitted for them to speak. It is a shame for them to speak in the church.
    Put it into context. This is not speaking of a building, but of the church (the assembly). The Bible never speaks of a building as a church. It is not speaking of a Sunday School. It is not speaking of a business meeting. We hold those in a building that we unscripturally call a church, but the church is made up of baptized believers and we must differentiate between the two.
    He was specifically speaking of the assembly when it gathered for "edification" or worship. Apparently there women who would stand up and speak in tongues interrupting the preaching of the Word. This was forbidden, just as it would be forbidden for a woman to do such in asking a question or start to teach or interrupt the preaching of the pastor in anyway.

    36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
    --This was a rebuke to the whole church. They were proud. They had a full array of the spiritual gifts, so much so that they got to the place where they thought that they were the source of the Word of God, though Paul says this rather tongue-in-cheek, or sarcastically. It was a rebuke. They were not to be so proud of all the spiritual gifts that they did have.

    37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
    --Paul reminds them that he is writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Gift of the Spirit or not, these are commandments of the Lord, and they are to be obeyed, no matter how spiritual you may think you are. The same applies today.

    38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
    --But alas, some are too "spiritual" for their own good, and in the end will give account of themselves for it. Paul calls them for what they are. Ignorant. And they will remain that way, for they will remain in their refusal to be taught from the Word of God.

    39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
    --This much aligned verse, used over and over by the Charismatic church, is taken out of context. We have established the purpose of tongues, and why they have ceased. The context therefore of this verse is: "Forbid not to speak in tongues (in the first century)." He was writing to the church at Corinth. Context is important.

    40 Let all things be done decently and in order.
    --This is so important to apply everywhere.