Acts 2: Then and Now

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

Nah dude. Listen, you're right. It is indeed not a conversation with God. I understand that. It's just thanksgiving. That was my point: when did God start talking back via tongues?

Tongues are only praise and worship to God in another language (which should be interpreted in public). Men do the talking, God does the listening and enjoying. That is all speaking in tongues is (or at least should be)

The bible does not say it's just thanks giving..

But here is the real point, interpretations are for the church to be edified.
Prophecies edify the church too. Neither are "thank you Lord" type of sentences, they are churchward type of sentences how else can they be edifying to the church?

God does not need tongues to know someone is thanking Him. The point Paul is making is not the purpose of tongues is so you can thank God...who needs a language we don't understand to thank him?

The point rather is that only God understands it

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by shag

Praxeas, IYO when tongues in church is given (b4 an interpretation of that tongues) when the tongues is happening, who is speaking to who at that particular moment(Man to God or God to man?) then the interpretation would be exactly an explanation of that same thing being said in the unknown tongue, right?)
Just wondering exactly how U see it....

That person is not having a conversation with God. It does not mean what you guys think it means'

I gave an example when Paul said there is no interpreter to speak to himself. He didn't mean that tongue speaker is to have a conversation with himself, thank himself or pray to himself. It means he is to keep it to himself, so that only he hears

And the same goes for God only God understands "Unless he interpret"...he wasn't saying "He that speaks in tongues is talking to God". He was saying nobody else understands BUT God *unless he interpret"

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The contexts does not show that when Paul said "though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels" did not mean Paul wasn't serious about speaking with the tongues of men of angels.

I did not take it out of context. The context merely shows the point to the gifts of the Spirit is Love. One can do miracles but if he has not love he is nothing. The gifts are for edifying. Selfish misuse of the gifts is against the idea of Love.

That does NOT change one bit Paul's point about being able to speak in tongues of men and of angels.

What language do Pastors speak? French? The word Langauge means just that, a language. The context reveals tongues is one of the gifts of the Spirit and that the language is usually unknown but a language.

So please tell us about this unknown pastoral langauge? Aren't Pastors men too? Human languages would be Greek, English, Akkadian..languages of our world.

What is a Pastoral language..a langauge Paul (a pastor of sorts) didn't know?

Im sorry but that is absurd and the context does not change the meaning of the word aggelos to Pastors. You've taken nothing from the context to show it means pastors and that Im wrong

Prax
How do you get that the point of gifts of the spirit is love? This is what the previous post I made was all about. The points I was making with from Ephesians and I Cor. 12 the gifts are given to equip the body to do our work of ministry to the world, and edification, and to bring the body into unity.
To bring the body into the knowledge of Christ.

As you yourself said the gifts are for edification, yet Paul said nothing of the misuse of the gifts. He said though I have the gifts and have not love I am nothing. In other words he is saying Love is more important than having gifts of the spirit. FMPOV

Now with this thought in mind, I see that Paul is speaking of the presentation of the lanquage rather than a different language. "though I speak the language of men", you ask what is the language of a Pastor? Exactaly, he can speak in what ever language is spoken in the country he is addressing, but the way he presents that message is the way I think Paul is using this word. The same with language of angels, when they come and give a message from God what language do they speak? The same langauge of the People they are speaking to. I think Paul is speaking of the authority of the speaker when he speaks of language of angels, and I think he is speaking of the knowledge and eloquince of the speaker when he says language of men.

I know we can go round and round this all we want and not agree at this point I have made my point and concede the discution.

[JoeHardy07]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Joe seriously? Why even have the gift of interpretation of tongues? Why would God even give that gift? God does mean tongues to be interpreted sometimes so that the body may receive edifying. It is not always just between that person and God, but sometimes a person speaks in tongues and then prays that he may interpret for the church like Paul says.

You people seriously are not reading that entire portion of scripture.

Paul spends the entire first part of 1 Cor.14 telling us what tongues are. He spends the second half telling us why we need to interpret them.

If we are speaking to God it is called PRAISE!

Paul says: IF YOU SPEAK IN TONGUES, YOU ARE PRAISING GOD IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE! IF YOU DO THAT IN PUBLIC, INTERPRET IT!

WHY?????? WHY INTERPRET PRAISE?????


TO DETER CONFUSION!!!!!


IT WAS CAUSING CONFUSION! MUCH LIKE TODAY!!!!


That was the WHOLE POINT of interpretation! Paul is just saying if you feel like you just HAVE to speak in tongues in public, if you feel like you just have to praise God in another language, then you had better interpret it or have someone who can!

It was not some super spiritual act that lifts us to a euphoric state! It's just praise in another language!

Paul writes: IF YOU SPEAK/PRAY IN A TONGUE (yes he uses those interchangeably!!!) THEN YOU ARE GIVING THANKS NICELY, BUT NOBODY ELSE IS GONA UNDERSTAND YOU! SO TELL THEM WHAT YOU SAID OR HAVE AN INTERPRETER WHO CAN! WHY??????? SO NO VISITORS WILL BE C O N F U S E D!!!! AND CALL YOU A NUT JOB! Something Apostolics have come to hold as a symbol of pride.


I can tell you this "giving thanks well" is not something God does. It's what God moves upon men to do!

No, it is not some druggish event with spitting and shrieking and wallowing like pigs.

It's just praise in another language so that they Jews on the day of pentecost could not deny that what was happening was a miracle.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Prax
How do you get that the point of gifts of the spirit is love?

As I said in my last post, the purpose of the gifts is to EDIFY others. Love of others is counter selfishness. That is why Paul brings up Agape in the same context as the gifts and then moves into some who speaks in tongues edifies only himself so he should seek the gift of interpretation so others besides himself will be edified.

Notice that the context starts with the gifts, not love in 1Cor 12

This is what the previous post I made was all about. The points I was making with from Ephesians and I Cor. 12 the gifts are given to equip the body to do our work of ministry to the world, and edification, and to bring the body into unity.

Yup, but that is beside the point when it came to the issue I was addressing about Paul speaking in the tongues of men and angels

To bring the body into the knowledge of Christ.

Right.

As you yourself said the gifts are for edification, yet Paul said nothing of the misuse of the gifts.

Did he have to use the word "misuse" in order for you to see that?

Let me just cut and paste some key verses

1Co 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be uninformed.

1Co 12:3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus is accursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except in the Holy Spirit.

1Co 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

1Co 13:2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

1Co 13:4 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant
1Co 13:5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;
1Co 13:6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.
1Co 13:7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Paul instructs them on the correct purpose and use of tongues....clearly they had an issue then

1Co 14:3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.
1Co 14:4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
1Co 14:6 Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching?

Why is Paul instructing them on something they did not have an issue with?

1Co 14:9 So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air.

They had some sort of issue with tongues and it's use

1Co 14:12 So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.

They were eager for these manifestations but Paul has to instruct them to strive to excel in building up the church.

1Co 14:13 Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.

Why instruct them on this if they were properly using tongues to begin with? It seems they were all speaking in tongues, edifying themselves rather than seeking to edify the church as a whole.

1Co 14:20 Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature.

Paul again is instructing them. They were immature and this somehow was related to the gifts

1Co 14:23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?

So it seems the church did come together and everyone was just speaking in tongues. Nobody was being edified but the speakers

1Co 14:26 What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.

Paul instructing them again on proper church order and the gifts, not for personal use but to edify the body

1Co 14:27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret

Paul trying to limit the number of tongues to no more than 3. They clearly had a problem with this.

1Co 14:28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God

Clearly knowing no interpreter was present they all continued to just speak in tongues

1Co 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,

It caused confusion

He said though I have the gifts and have not love I am nothing. In other words he is saying Love is more important than having gifts of the spirit. FMPOV

And gifts without love is a misuse of the gifts

Now with this thought in mind, I see that Paul is speaking of the presentation of the lanquage rather than a different language. "though I speak the language of men", you ask what is the language of a Pastor?

There is no reason in the context to think aggelos means Pastor. Aggelos is the normal word for angels. Nor is there anything in the context of bible that suggests there is special language for pastors other than the language of men that one can speak as an anointed utterance, since the gifts and tongues ARE what the context is about we have to understand these languages inthat context

Exactaly, he can speak in what ever language is spoken in the country he is addressing, but the way he presents that message is the way I think Paul is using this word. The same with language of angels, when they come and give a message from God what language do they speak?

Paul is speaking of the gifts. You have to look at the context. Further Paul distinguishes the gift of tongues from speaking in his own known language this way

1Co 14:19 Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue

The word language refers to a language not the way a pastor speaks. There are the languages of men and of angels that Paul admits to speaking both in the context of the gifts of the Spirit

The same langauge of the People they are speaking to. I think Paul is speaking of the authority of the speaker when he speaks of language of angels, and I think he is speaking of the knowledge and eloquince of the speaker when he says language of men.

Again this ignores the context. The context is the gifts of the Spirit and in particular the gift of tongues, interpretation so everyone can understand and prophecy

The context

1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
1Co 12:30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?
1Co 12:31 But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.

1Co 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
1Co 13:2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

1Co 13:8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.

I know we can go round and round this all we want and not agree at this point I have made my point and concede the discution.

Ok

[Godsdrummer]

Brother Praxeas

I love you bro, and this is the first time we have come to a discustion where we have acctualy discused things without getting at each other so forgive me if I respond one more time.

Though we see the exact intent of how Paul is directing his discution to the church a little different, there is one thing you missed. The importance of tongues. As Paul states we are to seak the best gifts. Namely prophecy, yes they had a problem with tongues, just as I feel we have today. From my point of view they were doing what we do today in making tongues more important than they should be.

1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Do we spend more time edifieing ourself instead of the Chruch? I think so.

1Co 14:5 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.

Should we speak in tongues? Yes. but it should be keep in its place, Paul would rather that we prophesied, why because it edifies the church.

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

We have let tongues take the place of prophecy, but the precidence is prophecy, not the interpretation of tongues. Haveing experianced both in my life, I would rather have prophecy rather than tongues and interpretation. There is more power in prophecy.

In conclution, I do beleive in tongues, everyone that has the spirit of God speaks in tongues, although I personaly do not see that as needing to be the initial evidence. God can and does give his children a sign when needed. But for the most part the receiver should be the one to tell us if they have received the spirit of God or not. We should not have to look for a sign.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Brother Praxeas

I love you bro, and this is the first time we have come to a discustion where we have acctualy discused things without getting at each other so forgive me if I respond one more time.

Though we see the exact intent of how Paul is directing his discution to the church a little different, there is one thing you missed. The importance of tongues. As Paul states we are to seak the best gifts. Namely prophecy, yes they had a problem with tongues, just as I feel we have today. From my point of view they were doing what we do today in making tongues more important than they should be.

1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Do we spend more time edifieing ourself instead of the Chruch? I think so.

1Co 14:5 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.

Should we speak in tongues? Yes. but it should be keep in its place, Paul would rather that we prophesied, why because it edifies the church.

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

We have let tongues take the place of prophecy, but the precidence is prophecy, not the interpretation of tongues. Haveing experianced both in my life, I would rather have prophecy rather than tongues and interpretation. There is more power in prophecy.

In conclution, I do beleive in tongues, everyone that has the spirit of God speaks in tongues, although I personaly do not see that as needing to be the initial evidence. God can and does give his children a sign when needed. But for the most part the receiver should be the one to tell us if they have received the spirit of God or not. We should not have to look for a sign.

No disagreement

[Monarchianism]

Perhaps that is why our minister ( woman ) keeps saying that "it's not about speaking in tongues." She keeps talking about us not having to speak in tongues all the time at Church. I never understood it. I always thought it was a prayer going out to God for Him to answer; then she goes off and says we shouldn't? I do at home, because if I do it in Church, I know she'll preach on it.

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

This one is my favorite: Come thee back thou to me...est...I have been a Father to thee and thou's...return thou to my fold and be mine sheep.

Still searching for scripture to back that one up.

You've heard tongues be interpreted? Two or three weeks ago a woman interpreted tongues, and the tongue-talker was supposively saying "Come, come.. the time is near, it is at hand, ect.." There were two new women there that hopped up out of their seats and ran to the altar ( so I heard ). I wasn't there. I am only repeating what I was told. I missed that service.

[Praxeas]

Lately we've had tongues and interpretation very often. Sometimes twice a service