Interpretation with Tongues

[KWSS1976]

See the Acts accounts of those unbelievers understanding there own language, is linked to Corithians also..

Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
13 ¶ Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.


see those in the upperroom were praying and when they spoke in Tongues the onlookers understood just like in Coritieans

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pleasant1

Is there anyone who can explain to me why tongues is so harped on when Paul said if there is no interpretation then we should be quiet.

1) it is believed the tongues experienced in Acts is not synonymous with the gift of tongues but is a distinct experience. The reasoning for that is in Acts nobody ever interpreted the tongues AND it was always associated with receiving the Spirit for the first time

2) Paul was not actually teaching to keep silent if there is no interpretation but that after 2 or 3 times a tongue went forth and there was no interpretation then they should not continue to give the "message in tongues"

3) Paul was not actually saying to NOT speak in tongues in that case BUT to speak in tongues to yourself (do it quietly)

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

See the Acts accounts of those unbelievers understanding there own language, is linked to Corithians also..

Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
13 ¶ Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.


see those in the upperroom were praying and when they spoke in Tongues the onlookers understood just like in Coritieans

uh....no. Those unbelievers were not interpreting tongues. They did not have the Spirit so they did not have that gift. The speakers in tongues were speaking in The language of those unbelievers.

Those in the upper room were not praying for an interpretation so the church can be edified. It just does not say that. An Interpretation is not a tongue. Its an interpretation. Those unbelievers heard the TONGUES in their own language. That was what amazed them.

[KWSS1976]

Well Prax per your quote below this really does not matter anyway seeing how this does not happen anyway in the Church now days.. I have never heard tongues of the unbievers anyway, unless you count english as tongues...

uh....no. Those unbelievers were not interpreting tongues. They did not have the Spirit so they did not have that gift. The speakers in tongues were speaking in The language of those unbelievers.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

Well Prax per your quote below this really does not matter anyway seeing how this does not happen anyway in the Church now days.. I have never heard tongues of the unbievers anyway, unless you count english as tongues...

Who said anything about unbelievers speaking in tongues?

[KWSS1976]

That was a typo anyway ment to say I never heard tongues that the unbeliever in Church could understand or anyone else for that matter, like on the day of Pentecost

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

That was a typo anyway ment to say I never heard tongues that the unbeliever in Church could understand or anyone else for that matter, like on the day of Pentecost

I have heard of it but its rare. As far as we know it only happened in the book of acts once

[Sabby]

I've heard this argument for years. The baptism of the Holy Ghost (with the evidence of speaking in other tongues) is available to "whosoever will".

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. I Corinthians 14:22. The baptism of the Spirit ought not be confused with a gift of tongues that is used in a congregational setting (remember; a "sign" to the unbeliever). The believers of Paul's day obviously believed in "tongues" as a valid N.T. experience. We can swap proof texts all day re: prophecy vs tongues. Jesus said the Spirit would testify of HIM. The Spirit of prophecy is the testimony of JESUS. If either function is not exalting the Lord Jesus then it is misplaced. It remains a valid N.T. experience.

If someone doesn't want to believe that when believers are immersed in the Holy Spirit they will speak in tongues, more power to them. They are only robbing themselves of what they can receive from the LORD. There is no text available to "prove" otherwise.

A family member once told me that speaking in tongues is the least of "all gifts". (The noun "gifts" is not to be confused with the "baptism", which though a gift as well, is a first-time experience.)
I have to ask, who wouldn't want the least that God wants for them?