Have we confused tongues/int. with prophecy?

[DividedThigh]

yes they are often confused even by many of the ministry, really, dt

[Praxeas]

Paul's main point was Love and where the gifts came into that. So he points out the best gifts are those that edify OTHERS.

Yet in that vein Paul did not merely say "seek prophesy"

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.

"UNLESS", when does he that speaks in a tongue become equal to he that prophesies? when someone interprets so the church may be built up, because that was the point to prophesying, to build up the church

[Fiyahstarter]

What is YOUR definition of a prophet?

Is a prophet one who prophesies--or is there more to it? Can you prophesy and NOT be a prophet?

Someone help me out here.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Paul's main point was Love and where the gifts came into that. So he points out the best gifts are those that edify OTHERS.

Yet in that vein Paul did not merely say "seek prophesy"

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.

"UNLESS", when does he that speaks in a tongue become equal to he that prophesies? when someone interprets so the church may be built up, because that was the point to prophesying, to build up the church

I think we all agree that Paul said to seek all the gifts ... most earnestly prophecy ....

but the issue here is what is the function and purpose of tongues and interpretation ...

As long as I was in Pentecost ... tongues were almost always interpreted with the book ends "THUS SAITH THE LORD," ... or as to say this was a direct communique from God ...

Yet everything in 1 Corinthians 14, which is our primary source for teaching of the gifts and their purpose, tells me that tongues fits along the lines of singing a psalm, prayer, and thanksgiving, which in Paul's words edify the church as well, ... along with teaching, revelation, word of knowledge ... while inspired by the Spirit ... but, not per se, a prophetic message from God to the Church or those congregated.

1. Paul states that tongues are unto God ... while prophecy is unto men.

For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.3 But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation.4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church.

2. He then argues that tongues that are not intelligible, profits little as it is a sign to the believers. He reasserts that tongues is my spirit praying unto God. And that the believer cannot say "Amen" to your glossalaic thanksgiving if he can't understand it ... in the same way if I started singing in Chinese.

For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding. 16 Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer,[d] say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? 17 You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.

Here neither the song nor the tongue of thanksgiving is edifying, his onus (not mine) .... because it signifies nothing to the listener.

My question remains ... I can probably count the times I've heard tongues interpreted in which the sum total was the tongue-talker praising and glorifying God ... as exemplified by Paul in this passage.

I believe he's saying that we, the Church, is edified when we catch a glimpse of the tongue speaker praying and magnifying God ... as we see with ... Cornelius and his household when they spoke in tongues and magnified God (Acts 10) and the Jewish believers who heard the Apostles speak of the wonders of God (Acts 2) in their own language.

It is the role of the gift of prophecy that I believe many tongue talkers accompanied by their interpreters are trying to fill, imo.

If I take Sam's account of Paul also having to deal with the pagan practice of interpreting speaking fits of ecstasy as messages from the gods ... in context, Paul, may be trying to correct error in their liturgical Church practice that had crept in.

Paul states that is through prophesying that the unbeliever, backslider, doubter etc. seeking signs would be convicted of their sin. And would declare "God is among us".

Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers. 23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and inquirers or unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgment by all, 25 as the secrets of their hearts are laid bare. So they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, “God is really among you!”

[DAII]

And then of course there is the issue of Apostolica being very skeptical and at times fearful of the gift of prophecy moving in their midsts ... despite Paul saying that a unbeliever would fall down in repentance if all in the congregation were prophesying ...

Apostolic ... huh?

Hyperbole being used by Paul, perhaps ... but how many visitors have ran the other way because of they could not understand what was being said by a barrage of untelligible tongue talkers speaking for 20-30 minutes while being pressured to do the same?

[commonsense]

Yes, DA, It does seem to create fear. Most churches seem to totally ignore the prophecy part of the gifts.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by commonsense

Yes, DA, It does seem to create fear. Most churches seem to totally ignore the prophecy part of the gifts.

Most definitely it is ignored ... yet how many times have we heard growing up in this thing that "God confirmed the preaching tonight by speaking directly to us with tongues and interpretation"? Or "God revealed something about someone through tongues and interpretation, in our service"

Where do we get this? What is the precedent? This would seem to be a serious matter.

It is prophecy, unto men, that "speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort." (1 Cor. 14: 3) Each distinct as Paul uses KAI for each of these.

It is prophecy that reveals. (v. 24-16)

Yet this is not how tongues are used in 1 Corinthians 14 ...

notwithstanding, this passage being the only explicit teaching on the function and role of tongues and interpretation ... of which if we are speaking audibly in tongues Paul asks us to pray for understanding and for interpretation of our tongues ... which he says is an expression of thanksgiving, or praying towards God .... contrasted with singing, with understanding or intelligibly, as to edify those listening. (1 Cor 14:13-16)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tongues heard, understood and linked with praise, thanksgiving and declarations of the wonders of God ... all accompanied with understanding:

At Pentecost ... Acts 2: 8-11

8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.”

Home of Cornelius and Acts 10

For they heard them speaking in tongues[b] and praising God.

Paul on the subject, didactically:

13 For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding. 16 Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer,[d] say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? 17 You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.

I can only find tongues and prophecy operating together with John the Baptist's disciples when the spoke in tongues and prophesied in Acts 19... yet in the Apostolic/Pentecostal tradition the glossalalia was necessary initial evidence of being Holy Ghost filled and not necessarily linked to their prophesying that occurred simultaneously .... nor do we know if each spoke in tongues and each prophesied.

BTW, I think I've exhausted the only tongues we will find in the historical narrative of Acts ... 2 of 21 conversions manifesting tongues. Albeit, some have banked eternity on their being a distinction of necessary, essential, universal evidentiary tongues and the gift of tongues accompanied by interpretation ... without any explicit apostolic teaching to reach this conclusion.

That said, we are to weigh the prophetic and revelation as to its authenticity? and most definitely are edified and INSTRUCTED through them...

Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged.

I do not find this to be the case with tongues and interpretation or singing which is also to our edification.

[A.W. Bowman]

Just a couple of comments.

A question was raised concerning the gift of prophecy verses the office of prophet. There are entirely two different things. A prophet within the church carries the same weight and authority (and communication with God) as the prophets of old had. A study of the Tanakh (Ole Testament) will reveal that there were a great many prophets in Israel, not just the few we have books named after. While there is a movement abroad for the emergence of Apostles and Prophets within the church, the vast majority of these are false. Regardless of all of their religious sounding claims, doctrines, and edicts, the test is not in their words, but in their power. 1 Corinthians 4:15-21. Also see: Revelation 2:2. Their power ‘in the Spirit’ gives evidence to their spiritual authority. The spiritual authority (and spiritual power) that a true ‘called’ prophet may legitimately exercise can be observed throughout the OT writings.

Even so, one cannot substitute the demonstration of power as the ‘proof’ of divine authority, although it is a good indication. After testing the Prophet or Apostle, one must also test the spirits that these individuals call (rely) upon. Remember, we have been warned of the false apostles, prophets and teachers, of which offices many false ‘pastors’ fall into, along with the evil spirits that work to influence and deceive.

The gift of prophecy, however, is a true gifting, not a calling or office. It is a gift of God for spiritual correction, instruction, fore-telling, and encouragement. A gift that is not that dissimilar to that of a called prophet. Right? No. For with the called prophet, he has the spiritual authority to impose the words of God on the people, and should they reject those words he may call judgment upon them.

An example of the difference and why the gift was so highly thought of by Paul: My late wife had the gift of prophecy. She exercised that gift under my authority and oversight – no one else!

When John Wimber was still a member of the California Yearly Meeting (CYM) of Friends (Quakers) and a pastor of one of its leading Southern California churches, he was also drawing fire from some of the organization’s leadership for his Bible studies (some estimate the number of students around 500), concerning some of his doctrines touching on church organization and the role of Holy Spirit in the lives of believers. Enter, my late wife.

All of the related events are too numerous to relate here but can be researched on the history of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship web pages. My wife confronted John on several occasions and provided instructions on how he should approach his upcoming break with the CYM and God’s call to form a new form of spiritual fellowship. My wife, along with several others, provided John with not only instructions, but also encouragement. John Wimber followed much of what he received and has publicly acknowledged these words of God through my wife’s testimony, and as they say, the rest is history. Carol Wimber (John’s wife) and my wife also exchanged several phone calls, to clarify different points of the several prophases. Once the Wimber’s knew and understood the messages to their satisfaction, what they did with that information from that point was their responsibility alone.

Here are the items of note:
1. All prophesies were received and given in English so everyone could judge them for themselves whether or not they were of God , another spirit, or from some woman’s imagination (yes, there were always additional witnesses to the sharing of these prophesies).
2. My wife had the ‘privilege’ of communicating God’s messages to the Wimber family, but she had no authority to impose, command, or require compliance. Neither did she have oversight authority nor responsibly to direct, or even monitor what, how or even if the Wimber’s implemented (observed) those instructions. She was only a messenger. Might I also add, she was a very effective one?
3. What ultimately happened to, and within, the Vineyard Christian Fellowship movement is another subject.

-------------------------

Another note: The word ‘unknown’, in all instances, as rendered in the NT concerning languages, does not exist in the original languages. The work ‘unknown’ is included by the English translators to indicate that the language (tongue) was ‘unknown’ to the speaker, not to one hearing the spoken word. However, the assumption that the speaker did not know, or was unfamiliar with the language he/she was speaking is a simple assumption, not a given. For example, in Acts 2, even while not everyone present spoke all of the languages that the disciples were speaking in, they all recognized that the ‘tongues’ were human and not angelic. Even at the conversion of the Cornelius’s household, everyone present recognized the subject of the ‘different’ languages being spoken. Acts 10:43-48

One of the suspected reasons that we are taught today that at Act 2 and 10 (as examples) included heavenly or prayer languages being in evidence is simply because that covers our lack of ‘unknown’ human tongues being so seldom in evidence in today’s services and alter calls. If experience and facts don’t match up, change history.

[DAII]

Thank you Elder for your insights and invaluable comments to this thread ... We most definitely agree as to the role of the office of prophet and ... the the gift of prophecy ...

The xenolalic thrust of Acts 10 and 2 was not lost early in the Pentecostal movement when men like Parham saw to validate their "apostolic" experience not just with tongues but proving they were known human tongues and were decipherable ... as not to violate the historical narrative which is plain. Even having Ozman write in her Chinese language.


A lot seems to have morphed since then with the concept of "heavenly, angelic" languages and often a validation of "lalalalala" as necessary, essential, initial evidence of being born of the Spirit ... and/or being baptized in the Spirit.

... included in this revision is the role and function of tongues and interpretation in our Pentecostal and even Charismatic liturgy. And for the life of me the text is plain. Where do we get this teaching that we are conduits revealing the mind of God through this gifting of tongues and interpretation?

This is not to say God can't work around our extrabiblical practice but as to solid witness to how the apostolic church practiced and taught it - it's filled with holes.

[Praxeas]

Ive heard interpretation start that way, but not always. What does that show? It shows what you are about to hear comes from the Lord.

What is the purpose? Paul said to edify the body