Speaking in tongues is Biblical ?!!?

[Brother Jerry]

Kerry Lou,

First of all welcome to CU.  I do hope that you enjoy your time here and I look forward to continued fellowship with you.

Secondly thank you for reading the posts.

Thirdly.  If you would like to continue where it was left off and provide what you believe to be scripture in support of speaking in unknown tongues I would be glad to read them as well as comment on them.  I did not select scripture that was only supportive of my position but selected scripture which was relevant to the discussion. 

The act of speaking in an unknown tongue during service or other times is not a new occurance.  It was something that went on during Pauls time and was important enough throughout the church at Corinth that Paul had to write about it in 1 Corinthians.  His dissertation about it is that if someone is speaking in a language that no one can understand then they are only edifying themselves and not the church.  And the church being that of Jesus.  And elsewhere throughout the NT we are to edify Jesus and glorify Him and not ourselves.  Paul also states that if someone is to speak in an unknown tongue then there had best be 1-2 translators there.  So that they can translate what was said for everyone else to understand.  Which of course if there is 1 other person there that can understand what is said then it is not an unknown tongue anymore...it is a language or tongue. 

All other verses that could possibly be interpreted as showing support speaking in an unknown tongue must be viewed in light of the simple verses that Paul spoke on the matter.  And when that is done those verses are shown to be interpreted incorrectly.  We must always start wtih the simple and get more complex.  When we have a simple verse in front of us then we cannot attempt to interpret what is meant in the simple verse based on our interpretation of the more complex verses.

But please post what you feel the Bible says in support of that.

And if you go back and read the events at Cornelius' house you will find that everyone was effected.  They all understood what everyone else was saying.  They heard things in tongues.  Notice it is not an unknown tongue, but tongues that is mentioned.  And we see reference to tongues as mentioned before in Acts in which we see that when the event were to happen the people hear what the others are saying in their own language.  Not an unknown language but their own language.

I look forward to reading what you bring to the table.

[kerrylou1]

Brother Gerry,

Let me first say, while I believe in speaking in tongues and as evidence of the baptism in the Spirit, it is not what I am all about. It is a part of the all inclusive experience of salvation brought to us by our Lord Jesus Christ. I have found it both Scriptural and very real. I understand some people's apprehension due to excesses in the Charismatic movement but I will not deny my faith. What I will do is put forward some thoughts and questions and you can answer them as you will.

You seem fixated with this idea about tongues and unknown tongues. One is right and the other is wrong. Yet I am concerned at how you come to your conclusion. So let me first ask you a question, do you know any man who speaks with and understands the languages of the angels (1 Corinthians 13:1)? I know the angels do and that God does but I have yet to meet a man who does.

There is a second question I would like to pose. You often refer to Cornelius' home and the events there. You say that everyone understood everyone else. Are you reading the same Bible as me or, have you concluded because it says, "They heard them speak with tongues and magnify God" that this is sufficient proof that they understood each other? That is a pretty shaky foundation for declaring something to be a truth. Could it not equally be concluded that, because they heard them speak in tongues that they accepted they were glorifying God?

The phrase "unknown tongue" used in Pentecostal and Charismatic circles comes from Isaiah's prophecy in the Old Testament as translated in the KJV, "With a stammering lip and an unknown tongue I will speak to this people." I notice even the NKJV alters this to fit known languages rather than unknown ones. We can get rather semantic if we argue over phrases rather than discuss the doctrine.

Yours in Christ,

Kerry

[Soldier4Christ]

There is a difference in using unknown tongues and the use of tongues? None of the Greek manuscripts used the word unknown in regards to the use of tongues. This was a word that was added in to some English versions.

We see in Acts 2:4 as it being called "other" tongues and in Acts 2:6 that those present "heard them speak in his own language" and again in Acts 2:11 "we do hear them speak in our tongues" not an "unknown" language. In Acts 10:46 "they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God". If it were in "unknown" tongues how would they know that they were magnifying God? They wouldn't for if it were a language unknown to any of them they may have been praising the devil and no one would have known it.

As for the tongues of Angels, I also ask you what this means. Does it mean that they have a separate language unknown to men or when they speak can they be understood by everyone present even if those present know various different languages? Where in the Bible does it say the angels language cannot be understood by men?

[Brother Jerry]

Expanding upon what PR was stating with the "language of the angels", let me address with a couple of questions.
If you consider it a language that is different than the languages of men, how did the angel speak to Joseph and Mary?  The angels that spoke to Lot?  And many other examples.  It is presumption to assume that 1 Corinthians 13:1 is referring to two different languages when we have many examples of angels speaking to men in the languages of men. 

Ok in Acts 10 is the event at Cornelius house.  This is the key turning point of the Gospel from Jew to Gentile.  Until this point Peter and the others primarily focused on the Jews, and many thought that the Word was for them and still not for the Gentile.  We saw earlier where speaking in tongues is for signs, and Jews seek after signs.  This is the sign.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Notice in verse 44 the words "all them which heard the word"  This means that the Holy Ghost did not cause Peter to speak in tongues, but that the Ghost fell upon ALL that heard.  The Ghost went and fell upon the audience. And in this example of speaking in tongues is a listening event more than a speaking event.   But back in Acts 2 it is more of speaking event, for the Holy Ghost fell upon the speakers and they spoke in "other tongues", not new or unknown.  And back in Acts 2 we know what those other tongues were as well.  They were any of the languages that would have been used by the people within listening distance.

...that this is sufficient proof that they understood each other? That is a pretty shaky foundation for declaring something to be a truth. Could it not equally be concluded that, because they heard them speak in tongues that they accepted they were glorifying God?

Quite simply...no.  Why?  Because the Bible does not say that.  What the Bible does say is "the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word" and follows up with "For they heard them speak with tongues".  It does not say they spoke.  It says they heard.  And from here we have to look elsewhere for further answers, because standing alone these verses could mean either.  Within the same book (Acts) we have another example of "speaking in tongues" back in Acts 2.  And there we see it clearly points out that listener hears the person speaking in their own language and not an unknown language.  Then we continue and we see Paul comments on how those that speak in an unknown language edify themselves and not Christ.  So this confirms that the speaking in tongues mentioned in Acts 10 was another event that dealt with known languages that those who were listening could understand, and it was a sign for the Jews to understand that Gospel and thus God was not God of the Jews, but God of all.

I hope that helps to understand where I come from on that and the Biblical principles I use.  You are correct in that I am sure we could talk about it all day long and not change a thing.  And it is not an issue worth arguing about.  I get the impression your background is Holiness and from what I know of most of them the important stuff is spot on.... Jesus=Son of God, Died on Cross for our sins, rose 3 days later.  Salvation is gift from God, given through Jesus' sacrifice...etc.  So I do not think we will shake each others faith at all...and I am not intending that.  Just good ole fashion Bible study and discussion.

[nChrist]

Brother Jerry Said:

I hope that helps to understand where I come from on that and the Biblical principles I use.  You are correct in that I am sure we could talk about it all day long and not change a thing.  And it is not an issue worth arguing about.  I get the impression your background is Holiness and from what I know of most of them the important stuff is spot on.... Jesus=Son of God, Died on Cross for our sins, rose 3 days later.  Salvation is gift from God, given through Jesus' sacrifice...etc.  So I do not think we will shake each others faith at all...and I am not intending that.  Just good ole fashion Bible study and discussion.

AMEN Brother Jerry!

There is no condemnation for those of us who are IN JESUS CHRIST. Our real fellowship is IN JESUS, and this will be so for ETERNITY. We are already MEMBERS OF THE ETERNAL BODY OF CHRIST, and all of our disagreements will be left behind when we go home to be with HIM. All of man's denominations, labels, and tags will be left behind and useless.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 18:46 NASB  The LORD lives, and blessed be my rock; And exalted be the God of my salvation,

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters, the following portion of Scripture is the ultimate source of knowledge about tongues in the Holy Bible, and it gives instructions about the acceptable or unacceptable use of tongues. I'll let the Scriptures speak for themselves without any commentary at all.
________________________

1 Corinthians 14:1 NASB  Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.
1 Corinthians 14:2 NASB  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.
1 Corinthians 14:3 NASB  But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation.
1 Corinthians 14:4 NASB  One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church.
1 Corinthians 14:5 NASB  Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying.
1 Corinthians 14:6 NASB  But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching?
1 Corinthians 14:7 NASB  Yet even lifeless things, either flute or harp, in producing a sound, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp?
1 Corinthians 14:8 NASB  For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1 Corinthians 14:9 NASB  So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air.
1 Corinthians 14:10 NASB  There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning.
1 Corinthians 14:11 NASB  If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me.
1 Corinthians 14:12 NASB  So also you, since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church.
1 Corinthians 14:13 NASB  Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret.
1 Corinthians 14:14 NASB  For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
1 Corinthians 14:15 NASB  What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.
1 Corinthians 14:16 NASB  Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying?
1 Corinthians 14:17 NASB  For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified.
1 Corinthians 14:18 NASB  I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all;
1 Corinthians 14:19 NASB  however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
1 Corinthians 14:20 NASB  Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
1 Corinthians 14:21 NASB  In the Law it is written, "BY MEN OF STRANGE TONGUES AND BY THE LIPS OF STRANGERS I WILL SPEAK TO THIS PEOPLE, AND EVEN SO THEY WILL NOT LISTEN TO ME," says the Lord.
1 Corinthians 14:22 NASB  So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.
1 Corinthians 14:23 NASB  Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?
1 Corinthians 14:24 NASB  But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all;
1 Corinthians 14:25 NASB  the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.
1 Corinthians 14:26 NASB  What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.
1 Corinthians 14:27 NASB  If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret;
1 Corinthians 14:28 NASB  but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.
1 Corinthians 14:29 NASB  Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
1 Corinthians 14:30 NASB  But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.
1 Corinthians 14:31 NASB  For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted;
1 Corinthians 14:32 NASB  and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets;
1 Corinthians 14:33 NASB  for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.
1 Corinthians 14:34 NASB  The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.
1 Corinthians 14:35 NASB  If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.
1 Corinthians 14:36 NASB  Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?
1 Corinthians 14:37 NASB  If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment.
1 Corinthians 14:38 NASB  But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.
1 Corinthians 14:39 NASB  Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues.
1 Corinthians 14:40 NASB  But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

[kerrylou1]

Brother Jerry,

Forgive me, I don't know how to add multiple quotes in my reply to you so I ask you to be paitient in my weakness.

With regards to your reply concerning languages of angels and men. You contend that men understood angels but concluded because those angels spoke the languages of men. That is still not conclusive evidence that angels always speak the languages of men.

With regard to your answer on Acts 10 in Cornelius' home, I am surprised at how you misconstrue the sentence structure. You saying that the Holy Ghost fell upon them because they heard Peter speaking in tongues? That's an interesting twist. Let me tell you how I plainly read and interpret that same passage.

"And those of the circumcision who believed and had come with Peter were astonished because the Gift of the Holy Ghost had been poured out on the gentiles also; for they (of Peter's party) heard them (of Cornelius'household) speak with tongues and magnify God. So Peter answered, "Can anyone forbid these to be baptised in water who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." (paraphrased).

I think, if you were to take it to someone who teaches english structure on subject and matter that this is quite correct. You will find also that it sits more comfortably with the passages of events in Acts 2 and Acts 19.

Let us return to Acts 2 where there is the emphasis of understanding what was being said. We all know that it plainly states that those who heard understood because they heard it in their own language. However, I must ask, how did some conclude that these were drunk (as they derided). Why did Peter, under the annointing of the Holy Spirit feel to defend the accusation? I have met many drunks I could not understand and, let me tell you, none of them were speaking another language. I would have described it in the same manner you describe the Pentecostal/Charismatic utterances common in their churches - gibberish.

I must leave for work now so I'll leave you to consider what I have just said and will return as soon as possible.

Love Kerry.

[nChrist]

Brother Kerry Said:

Let us return to Acts 2 where there is the emphasis of understanding what was being said. We all know that it plainly states that those who heard understood because they heard it in their own language. However, I must ask, how did some conclude that these were drunk (as they derided). Why did Peter, under the annointing of the Holy Spirit feel to defend the accusation? I have met many drunks I could not understand and, let me tell you, none of them were speaking another language. I would have described it in the same manner you describe the Pentecostal/Charismatic utterances common in their churches - gibberish.

Hello Brother Kerry,

I would simply ask if the utterances you speak of are according to the Biblical instructions of 1 Corinthians 14. If they aren't, they would represent a violation of the peace and order instructions for our churches.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Matthew 18:4 NASB  "Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

[kerrylou1]

Dear Tom,

Yes, I believe they are. And also taking into consideration 1 Corinthians 12 & 13. We do not allow declaration in tongues without interpretation. However we do allow the individual to exult in the Lord in tongues which, perhaps is where you would have a problem. You must understand that Tongues is not the central issue of our preaching - though we stand fast in the liberty Christ has given us. It is obviously more important to us that those who hear receive what is being said. I agree with Paul. I would rather speak to you in the language you understand so that you may receive what is been said than to stand on a street corner talking to the air. You may not believe this but you are more important to me than I am to myself.

Love,

Kerry.

[kerrylou1]

Brother Jerry,

Continuing where I left off. Sorry about the break.

It appears, from the reaction in Acts that, although all those who originally heard understood there was some debate afterward about the accuracy of their assumption they had actually understood. Now, I'm sure you would never have convinced those who heard and received that which was said that they had not heard it but, something created doubt so that Peter (led by the Holy Spirit) felt it necessary to defend that which they heard. And how does he begin, "These are not drunk as you suppose." Sounds to me like popular opinion was shifting.

How could the doubters confuse those who had heard so clearly? I believe Isaiah gives us the understanding when he prophesies, "With a stammering lip and (for your sake) foreign languages I will speak to this people." Isaiah 28:11. I am sure you have heard one speak with a stammer? I had a friend who stuttered so bad that he was almost impossible to understand. While I was trying to understand what he was telling me one day I thought, "He sounds just like someone speaking in other tongues." It may not mean much to you but, to me it was like turning a light on. No longer was I skeptical because I saw the Biblical connection to what was happening.

Interestingly, when I first came to know him I needed someone else to interpret what he was saying (even though he was speaking perfect English - just with his bad stutter) until I learned to take the small but clear parts and discern what he had said.

I think that's enough of that.

You mentioned that you perceived that I came under the holiness teaching? I suppose you are right, although I don't have much knowledge of the actual doctrines. I do recall my dad telling me, when I asked why the Assemblies of God here in Australia taught so differently to the one in southern Africa where I grew up that the Assemblies of God in South Africa and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) came from the holiness movement and was formed by 2 Elim missionaries (Fred and James Mullen) whereas the Asuza Street had not. Although I must add that the most readily available doctrinal books were Baptist (their missions ran the bookstores over there) so you may see that appear on the odd occasion.

Love Kerry.

[nChrist]

Hello Brother Kerry,

We can agree to disagree on this issue with no problem. I don't know anyone, even within the same church building, who has 100% agreement on every single issue. This would especially be true for older Christians with many years of Bible study on their own, independent from the church.

This brings up one point that I would like to make. What the Bible teaches is more important than what a particular denomination or affiliation teaches. This is just one reason why a person's own Bible study is very important. Every single thing that a pastor teaches should not be necessarily taken as absolute truth, and this would be true in all churches. This is one reason why I think that most outstanding pastors encourage those in their congregations to study the Bible much more than just an hour or two a week in church.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Hebrews 11:1-3 NASB  Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval. By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

[Brother Jerry]

Kerry Lou

the use of a [ followed by "quote" and then a closing ]  will start the quote.  Then at the end you will do the same thing but in the brackets will be a "/quote" (minus the ")  You can do this as many times as you like in a post.  Hope that helps.

Now as for the reference in Acts 10.  I think you will find that you are incorrect in what an English teacher would say.  Because you are forgetting one thing and that is context.  We can see some more context by looking at the previous verse.  "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word."  This lets us know that the Ghost fell upon everyone who heard the word and not the speaker.

So then we look at verse 45 "And they of the circumcision which believed (Jewish Christians) were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the HOly Ghost.  For they (the Jewish Christians) heard them (the Gentiles) speak with tongues, and magnify God..."

And now you agree that back in Acts 2 the event of tongues was a listening event.  The Bible clearly states that they heard them speaking in their own languages.  But yet you want to question what was said and try to say that they were speaking in an unknown language that sounded as though they were drunk? The verse in Acts 2 clearly state in serveral verses that people were hearing others speak in their own languages.  Their only explanation for what they were witnessing could have been that they assumed they were drunk or they themselves were drunk. 

We cannot attempt to read more into the Bible than what is already there.  God's Word is perfect and every word has a purpose.  Not only in Acts 2 but also back in Acts 10 the event of speaking in tongues appears to not be a new or unknown language, but only speaking or hearing in languages that are known.  Paul then writes in Corinthians about speaking in tongues and preaches on how speaking in an unknown tongue is self edification.  And that if anyone speaks in an unknown language then there should be a translator or two around, which by the way as soon as there is another person who understands what is spoken it is no longer an unknown language. 

As far as the language of Angels.  Personally 1 Corinth 13:1 could indicate either way, as far as a language that is both of men and angels, or a language of men as well as a language of angels.  But we have to look further in the Bible and the interaction of angels with man.  What we see is the angels speaking the languages of man.  We are given no other indications of a langauge all their own.  Could there be one?  Sure but it is pure supposition to state that there is.  While there is more evidence Biblically to state that God gave them the gift to understand and speak all of the languages of man.  Or God grants them the gift of a language when needed. 

And I am sure that ultimately as PEB said we will end up agreeing to disagree.  And I also feel that if we would like to continue this then we should do so via email.  My desire is not to show dissent or division within God's body (being us).  And rest assured that none of this is a division on the core doctrine and I am sure that you do not beleive that if one does not speak in tongues that they cannot be saved or anything like that.  Only Jesus may save and accepting Christ is the only way to secure eternal salvation.  The doctrine of speaking in tongues is not an issue of concern when it comes to salvation or the Love Jesus has for us.

This brings up one point that I would like to make. What the Bible teaches is more important than what a particular denomination or affiliation teaches. This is just one reason why a person's own Bible study is very important. Every single thing that a pastor teaches should not be necessarily taken as absolute truth, and this would be true in all churches. This is one reason why I think that most outstanding pastors encourage those in their congregations to study the Bible much more than just an hour or two a week in church.

AMEN to that PEB.  I have seen far to many people in my life that base their entire walk with what their pastor has to say and not what the Bible has to say.  For most it is OK because their Pastor is right on....but it is not OK because God wants us to study in the Word and grow and prosper.  We should be able to tell someone what the Bible has to say about something, not what our pastor had to say about something.

[kerrylou1]

Brother Gerry,

Sorry, I misunderstood your other post. I thought you were saying that Peter and his group were speaking in tongues and that the household of Cornelius heard (understood supernaturally). I do not deny that is possible but it actually appears we agree on who did the speaking and who heard.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Actually I was getting annoyed with myself because I read the site and know that this is not a preferred subject on this forum. I respect any request that is made of me and did not come to share to cause any angst. I do mourn because I feel that people reject the specific gift of Christ (he will baptise you with the Holy Ghost) and I have no regrets over the way I have followed Christ and have believed. The Father has never let me down. My greatest joy is sharing my enthusiasm with others and learning how Christ has made them anew. We can spend so much time over these things that we forget to take the gospel into the world. I discovered that I was preaching to the converted and forgot so many who are in great peril. I hope you can understnd my heart. I love discussing the Bible but I sincerely grieve everytime I hear of one who has died without knowing Christ as Lord and Saviour.

Once again, sorry for the misunderstanding and, thank you, Tom for your encouragement.

Love,

Kerry.

[Soldier4Christ]

The only time this subject is not "a preferred subject" is when people put more emphasis on it than they do on the renewing of the spirit. All too often individuals associate it as being the same thing, claiming that if you do not speak in tongues then you have not experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Or sometimes saying "you just don't have enough faith" as if having this gift makes someone closer to God than another, putting more emphasis on tongues than on the more important things. There are many gifts that God imparts to us through the Holy Spirit according to His will, His desires, His purposes. Not all gifts are imparted as we would desire them to be.

What exactly is the baptism of the Holy Ghost?

[Brother Jerry]

What PR said.  I know here is the Southern US we have what we call Holiness movements....Charismatic churches which are those that speak in tongues and some many other things...including snake handling and the sort.  And it seems more often than not lately that they are similar to the prosperity gospels that if you are prospering materially then you are not blessed by God.  And more and more are starting to state that if you are not speaking in tongues then you are either not in the graces of God, or have never received God. 

I truly believe that you have your head on strait and understand first and foremost what is right.  And that no matter what tongues is secondary to the Gospel of Jesus.

Have a blessed day.