Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrine?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Sam

How do you know if there is no interpreter present without going ahead and giving the message? After the utterance is given, let there be a pause and see what happens. If there is no interpretation, let the service go on, but don't give out with another message.

I think there can be someone present that may possibly quench the gift out of fear or for whatever reason. I was guilty of that very thing years ago. I learned not to fear and follow after His Spirit. Some people get a thought on the interpretation and make the error thinking that they need to have more in order to proceed. Not so, you only need very little prompting and must have faith.

Sometimes God will give you more and sometimes less, it's by faith......

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Good question. In addition to what you stated, I also believe the gift (of interpretation is a gift that one receives and is often used repeatedly in.

I agree. I think when you have been used, you recognize that feeling and become more sensitive as you feel after the mind of God.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

It would be unfair for me to comment concerning your personal experience.

In spite of our Pentecostal conditioning it's apparent to me that giving instruction, to limit speaking in tongues in the public assembly to those tongues being interpreted - with an alternative of keeping "silent", is not quenching the Spirit.

If we need to re-think some things, then so be it. The Corinthians had to restructure as well.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

I may have missed it but do you think it is okay to speak quietly in tongues in church if you are not disrupting the entire congregation?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Sam

How do you know if there is no interpreter present without going ahead and giving the message? After the utterance is given, let there be a pause and see what happens. If there is no interpretation, let the service go on, but don't give out with another message.

We need to be careful we don't impose restrictions that are overly tight on people. That could quench the Spirit or put people in fear.

The way I understand the order of speaking with tongues in 1 Corinthians is that it is speaking of the gifts of the Spirit, as operated in a public service, not what happens when people are baptized in the Spirit. It does not apply to what happens when hands are laid upon a person to impart the Spirit baptism or to what happens when people at the altar, where many are praying together aloud, may speak out in tongues as the Spirit blesses them. In my opinion, no interpretation is required here although I've heard of it being done.

If we get too dogmatic, legalistic, or too concerned with "order" people will be afraid to speak out if they feel like they are being used to give a message in tongues.

If everyone is praying aloud at the same time, in my opinion, those prayers could be in one's known language or in one's prayer language. If one person is leading in prayer from the congregation or from the platform, those prayers should be in the common known language. If you are asked to bless the food, or bless the offering, or to dismiss the service, it should be in the commonly known language unless you (or someone else) interpret.

But to silence or muzzle someone who might get a little happy and say a few words in tongues when someone else can hear them, would, in my opinion, be following the letter of the law and not the spirit.

Hey, we're Pentecostal. Tongues happens in our churches. If people don't know that coming in, they find out sooner or later. Too much "decently and in order" can dry things up.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

I may have missed it but do you think it is okay to speak quietly in tongues in church if you are not disrupting the entire congregation?

In my opinion, yes it is OK.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Sam

We need to be careful we don't impose restrictions that are overly tight on people. That could quench the Spirit or put people in fear.

If we get too dogmatic, legalistic, or too concerned with "order" people will be afraid to speak out if they feel like they are being used to give a message in tongues.

But to silence or muzzle someone who might get a little happy and say a few words in tongues when someone else can hear them, would, in my opinion, be following the letter of the law and not the spirit.

Hey, we're Pentecostal. Tongues happens in our churches. If people don't know that coming in, they find out sooner or later. Too much "decently and in order" can dry things up.

I agree!!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Here is the bottom line

27If 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.

28But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

I would concede Verse 28 may indicate "speaking in tongues" silently or softly (inaudible), but not that others can hear.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

I may have missed it but do you think it is okay to speak quietly in tongues in church if you are not disrupting the entire congregation?

I did mention that above, but the "if you are not disrupting" part is subjective - especially to Pentecostals who may argue backflips and other spastic eruptions are "in order".

[freeatlast]

How about this scenario.

I recall a minister who rarely made it thru a sermon of bible study without speaking in tongues in the mic.

Anybody could repeat "his tongues". it was always the same "hondamoshia- oh hondamoshia

I have always felt this violiated Pauls teaching on tongues in the church

[Sam]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

How about this scenario.

I recall a minister who rarely made it thru a sermon of bible study without speaking in tongues in the mic.

Anybody could repeat "his tongues". it was always the same "hondamoshia- oh hondamoshia

I have always felt this violiated Pauls teaching on tongues in the church

Have you heard Sis. Freeman or seen her on DVD?
She often rejoices and speaks with tongues several times in her sermons.
But, who would try to silence her and say she's out of order?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Sam

We need to be careful we don't impose restrictions that are overly tight on people. That could quench the Spirit or put people in fear.

The way I understand the order of speaking with tongues in 1 Corinthians is that it is speaking of the gifts of the Spirit, as operated in a public service, not what happens when people are baptized in the Spirit. It does not apply to what happens when hands are laid upon a person to impart the Spirit baptism or to what happens when people at the altar, where many are praying together aloud, may speak out in tongues as the Spirit blesses them. In my opinion, no interpretation is required here although I've heard of it being done.

If we get too dogmatic, legalistic, or too concerned with "order" people will be afraid to speak out if they feel like they are being used to give a message in tongues.

If everyone is praying aloud at the same time, in my opinion, those prayers could be in one's known language or in one's prayer language. If one person is leading in prayer from the congregation or from the platform, those prayers should be in the common known language. If you are asked to bless the food, or bless the offering, or to dismiss the service, it should be in the commonly known language unless you (or someone else) interpret.

But to silence or muzzle someone who might get a little happy and say a few words in tongues when someone else can hear them, would, in my opinion, be following the letter of the law and not the spirit.

Hey, we're Pentecostal. Tongues happens in our churches. If people don't know that coming in, they find out sooner or later. Too much "decently and in order" can dry things up.

As a Pentecostal we may (or not) agree, but what about Paul's instruction concerning the unlearned then? Is it applied as an option only?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Sam

Have you heard Sis. Freeman or seen her on DVD?
She often rejoices and speaks with tongues several times in her sermons.
But, who would try to silence her and say she's out of order?

Paul not only would, he already did!