Featured Seeking truth about "tongues"...

1. The only ones speaking are those the Spirit gave utterance - v. 4
2. The only ones speaking were "Galileans" - v. 7
3. The only ones performing signs (tongues) and wonders and miracles are
the twelve - v. 43; Acts 3, Acts 4:33; Acts 5:12

 

THat does not prove that only the 12 spoke in tongues! There were 120 in the upper room.

Your point?

You added tongues to the list! It does not include tongues in those scriptures!
It is still clear that more than JUST the apostles performed miracles through the Holy Spirit. It is also clear that more than the apostles spoke in tongues. So your theory is wrong!

 

The statement does not demand all 120 spoke in tongues but only those that were given utterance among them.

The twelve were Galileans, but this occurred in Judea in Jerusalem and not in Galilee. Your position would have to deny any disciples in Judea were present.

God did not invent tongues as a "sign" AFTER Pentecost but it is a "sign" gift FROM Pentecost. The apostles are the only Christians exercising "signs" not the regular church members and tongues are among the "signs."

Clear from WHAT? Scripture please that shows that anyone but apostles performed miracles, signs and wonders between Acts 2 and Acts 6?

 

Tongues is just one of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit. All the gifts were given to the church to edify the church! THe sign to the Jews were that the Holy Spirit had been poured out, just like Peter said in verse 16 and then he also said in vs. 33
"THerefore being by the the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he had shed forth this, WHICH YE NOW SEE AND HEAR" Peter is plain in what the sign was to the Jews.

No, You are ignoring what Corinthians is correcting, not to deny tongues but to do it in order in the church. Edification (spiritual) of self is needed to edify others. Do you study before you teach a lesson? Do you pray before going to church? Our faith is built up when we spend time with God, that includes praying in the spirit!

I have no problem with this! When tongues are in the assembly it needs to edify the church, period! Without the interpretation it is of no use in a church setting.

 

What you miss is that the spirit is edified! But I agree with Paul, that tongues should be interpreted in a congregation.

Yes, it does serve a purpose! God gave the gift to the believers. It is speaking to God in vs. 2! THat is prayer! You limit tongues to evangalizing! Paul does not! He spoke in tongues more than all BUT in the church in order to teach he did not! Tongues are not for teaching, that is not the purpose! Tongues was a sign that the Holy Spirit had been poured out as I showed above!

He says BOTH! IF we are to speak in church then speak with the understanding so all could be edified.

He does not say tongues was limited to the congregation. BUT when in Public we are not to speak in tongues without the interpretation. Notice too that Paul says YOU GIVE THANKS WELL! The prayer was good! It was just not edifying to the church! I agree with Paul, tongues in service should not be done without the interpretation.

Paul is clear that he speaks in tongues more than all of them. "Yet in the church" shows that he spoke in tongues outside the church.

He is clear that he does both, Pray in the spirit AND pray with understanding. If he prays in the spirit then he will pray with the understanding so that the othes will be edified or be able to say "AMEN" to his prayer. He tells them plain that their giving of thanks (prayer) is good, but the other is not edified. The correction is praying in the spirit without the interpretation in church!

THe only disaproval is that praying in the spirit without the interpretation is not edifying! He made it clear that the mind does not understand what we are saying. That is why we need to pray for the interpretation.

You limit tongues where Paul does not! It is not JUST a sign to the Jews! It says unbelievers! It is a sign to unbelievers.
1 Cor. 1 does not say it is for a sign to the Jews. It says "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish(unsaved) foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." It goes on to say the the Jews REQUIRE a sign, the Greeks seed after wisdom.

 

Paul did not say it was not a true manifestation! The people were just using their gifts wrong in the assembly.

 

It also does not say they did not! Why wouldn't they? Others than the apostles spoke in tongue!

Again, your point?

Again it is just an assumption that is disproved by other scriptures showing other people than the apostles performed miracles and spoke in tongues.

What does it matter if it is between those chapters? They stil performed miracles and manifested the Holy Spirit through the gifts of the Spirit!

 

It does not say the spirit is edified. He simply states the function is from the spirit and it is performing correctly.

Edification in this context has been spelled out clearly - vv. 6-
10 and it does not refer to our "spirit" but to our "mind."

 

So your argument fails.

My point is that all the rest of the contextual indicators do not support your position.

Again, what scriptures indicate anyone but apostles were performing miracles signs and wonders between Acts 2 and Acts 6????? You cannot affirm that on silence!

 

"Mostly" a book of correction?

Here's an exercise for you: Re-read the book of 1 Corinthians, pretending to be a member of that church; knowing that, as a member, you've been participating in the things Paul talks about throughout the whole letter to your church.

Because, when you look at verses like 1 Cor 14:15 and say that it means to you that Paul prays two ways, you overlook that Paul just got through telling people that they're praying wrong. You also overlook basic grammar rules in just about ALL languages, because the conjunction "and" means to include. If the verse said "or," then you could have two different things; but when you are inclusive, you have both things, not just one. In other words, Paul isn't saying he prays two different ways; he's saying he prays with the Spirit and with the understanding.

In other words, he's saying that if you pray without the understanding, then you're praying wrong.

 

1 Cor. 14:5,13 demand that interpretation is necessary for edification. Other's also have a "spirit" and they are not edified by hearing tongues any more than the person speaking is edified by hearing tongues.

The context demands that "edification" is equal to UNDERSTANDING THE MEANING:

6 ¶ 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?


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.

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.

Paul has a "spirit" and yet he receives nothing from hearing tongues without an interpreter.

You are suggesting that the speaker has a unique "spirit" that can be edified by the same tongues but the "spirit" in all the rest of the listeners cannot be edified listening to the same babble.

 

How do you pray in the spirit and your spirit not be built up?

 

You are confusing the aspect of human nature from whence the spiritual gift originates with edification. He is simply stating what aspect in man is performing the gift, not whether it is edifying to that aspect or any other aspect of man. Edification has to do with only one aspect of man - his mind, understanding. The immediately clearly spelled out meaning of edification makes this clear.

 

No! Yours fails because others spoke in tongues other than the apostles. So there is no reason why they would not have spoken in tongues on the Day of Pentecost.

Scriptures again prove your assumption wrong! All through scriptures it shows that more than the apostles spoke in tongues, so why do you say the 120 did not? THey were ALL in the upper room when the Holy Spirit came and they were ALL filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. So we will just have to disagree on this one!

It does not matter if it was done in Acts 2- Acts 6 or not! THey still did! Why do you limit it to just those chapters? What does that prove?

 

It is wrong in the church because no one is edified! THe correction was tongues without the interpretation throughout chapter 14. He does not forbid it! He does not deny that he spoke in tongues other than church. HE also makes it plain that speaking in tongues is speaking to God/ praying in the spirit/ blessing with the spirit/giving thanks.

 

Praying in the Holy Ghost is edifying! IN the church is the correction!

I agree with Paul, When I hear someone speak in tongues and do not know the meaning..it is not edifying! Speaking in tongues edifies self vs. 4. It is speaking to God!

Well if it is babble no one can benefit from it...but we are speaking of tongues, a manifestation of the Holy Spirit.
How do you edify your self praying in the Holy Ghost? Because the Bible says you can!

 

True manifestations of God cannot be used "wrongly". When God is in direct control it will go as He pleases. It cannot be user wrong it cannot be abused we cannot over power God.

 

Paul says in vs. that tongues edifies self! In church it edifies all when the interpretation is given (vs. 5).
So you are never build up in your spirit?

 

Paul did not say what they were saying (the utterance from the Holy Spirit) was wrong! As a matter of fact he tells them that they givest thanks well. It is just not edifying to the church!

 

So what you are telling me is that you believe this was a manifestation of Spirit, that God showed up in a miraculous way, endued them with the momentary ability to speak in tongues that they could not otherwise speak but that God got it wrong and was not able to edify the church.

So God showed up and failed to do what He came to do.

See you cannot have it both ways. You cannot have God how up and manifest His Spirit and then those He works through gets it wrong and needs to be corrected. You cannot have both of those at the same time. Placing the blame on the people does not make it alright because in the end you are still saying God failed.