Tongues in a public setting?

Hello all, can i start a new thread with regard to the use of tongues or different heavenly languages,From the thread on it being initial evidence, much was said and shown that it is a manifestation/ministration from God.This we do not doubt.What i would invite comments on is,Within a context of a gathering where there are non-believers should there be corporate speaking or singing in tongues without interpretation?Wayne Grudem in his systematic theology chapter 53 seems to say that all speaking/singing in tongues should have an interpretationAny comments please?

What i would invite comments on is,Within a context of a gathering where there are non-believers should there be corporate speaking or singing in tongues without interpretation?Paul talks about spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12-14, and the guidelines for public speaking in tongues is given in chapter 14 verses 26-28. Paul lays out as a general principle that the manefistations of the Spirit "must be done for the strengthing of the church." Then he says, "If anyone speaks in a tongue, two- or at the most three- should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God." So we see that in any given public meeting, no more than three people should be speaking in tongues, and they must speak one at a time, and there must be an interpreter. It seems that the Corinthian church was putting too much emphasis on the gift of tongues, and this happens very often today. While it is a real and valuable gift, we must watch that we do not have an unhealthy focus on it, or any other gift of the Spirit for that matter. We must keep are eyes on Jesus! Paul wrote this letter to instruct the church on how to preserve this gift, and use it in a way that pleases God and edifies the entire congregation. Today there are many abuses going on in the name of the Spirit of God and its a terrible thing because it causes many to shy away from the Holy Spirit all together. That is why we must submit to the authority of God's Word. To quote Jim Cymabala's Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire, "If you have only the Word, you dry up. If you have only the Spirit, you blow up. But if you have both, you grow up."God Bless, Jake Kail

1Corinthians 14 talks about two different types of tongues. Tongues for the church for the purpose of edification, and tongues for the purpose of edifying self.There are a few verses saying simply that it conversation between the Spirit in us and God himself. But when there is a message for the Church, the Bible says not to speak, UNLESS there is an interpreter. Why? Because it will be unfruitful. Nothing will be profited to the believers.At my church many people sing praises to God in the Spirit (tongues). Usually after the singing and worshipping the room will quiet down and God will speak through someone either through prophecy, or through tongues. This is the message for the church. It is then interpreted and everyone receives edifying.Hope that helped...

Hi msamiec,thanks for that,1Corinthians 14 talks about two different types of tonguesI'm not sure that it says 2 types of tongues.do you mean 2 types of applications for example, personal prayer,but same laungage.and corporate prayer, same laungage with interpretation.I am interested in anyone's thoughts on corporate and simultainious tongue speaking/singing that happens in a meeting without interpretation.Can i point you to my first post and my Wayne Grudem reference..looking ahead & upDelboy ;-)

I am interested in anyone's thoughts on corporate and simultainious tongue speaking/singing that happens in a meeting without interpretation.Can i point you to my first post and my Wayne Grudem reference..If Wayne Grudem is talking about public meetings then he is correct. 1 Corinthians makes it clear that any speaking in tongues in a public service must be followed by interpretation. This serves 2 purposes: to keep the meetings from becoming chaotic, and to keep in mind that unbelievers may be present. However, if you are having a private prayer meeting with brothers and sisters in the Lord I see no scriptural reason for tongues having to be interpreted....However it should never be chaotic.I hope that helps...Jake Kail

I just remembered... I wrote an article about tongues:http://marcin.desseo.com/old/article_reader.php?top=studies&sub=toungesGod bless

However, if you are having a private prayer meeting with brothers and sisters in the Lord I see no scriptural reason for tongues having to be interpreted....However it should never be chaotic.Thanks JK I agree,msamiec thanks too, i looked at your article and it is helpful,your answers to objections though are brief and possibly dont explore the scriptures you use fullyI do speak in tongues and have interpreted in a public setting.I think Paul talks well when he says I would rather speak a few words and help someone to be closer to jesus than a thousand in tongues (my translation!) :-) Really guys I'm just exploreing the misuse that is around in alot of groupsLooking ahead & upDelboy

Hi here's my 2 cents worth. I am a bit more liberal, I think, in the way I interpret 1 Corinthians. I think 'silence' in this epistle is often 'relative'.1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.1 Corinthians 14:30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.all these verses use the same word, which really means 'shush'.I think the thrust of 1 Corinthians relates to individuals pushing themselves forward; every one of you says I [1Cor 1:12] Consequently I think these statements in 12-14 are not absolutes but relative. There are not many now who would insist that the sisters are not issued with hymnbooks because they are required to remain silent. I think this has to do with 'public utterance' in the sense of the voice raised to gain the attention of the whole meeting. I don't think we are to understand from this that everyone sat like stone carvings with not an 'amen' among them. The instruction is to prevent 'disorder'. I don't think a congregation 'singing' in tongues is disorderly, but I do think that several people vying for the attention of the meeting would be 'disorderly'. I think Paul is banning competition not corporate praise.WKIP

Hmmm! food for thought ron,so far on this thread i hav'nt looked at it this way.I think now we are getting a more fuller view on the subject.Thanks

Beloved,Tongues in a public setting that requires an interpretation is generally a fearsome event if God is in it. The problem is that so many "God is among you" or "the Lord is in your midst" nonsensical interpretations of "messages in tongues" in a public setting have went forth that they very impact of the phenomena has been all but mocked. When I was a young boy you could hear a pin drop when a message went forth and people would tremble before the Lord. We don't have te time or space to truly do justice to the doctrines of glossolalia- but let me just remind all my fellow Pentecostal/Charismatic brethren of this passage: "In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 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 14:21-22).Think about what was just said- the message was a sign to them that did not believe. When God interupts a service with a message in tongues friends He means business! It is a LAST resort on behalf of God to reach a person with a "different tongue" with a message they would not hear in "their tongue." this is generally the case. It is an act almost of judgment. Why would God use tongues when He EASILY could have used anointed prophecy or a word of knowledge, etc. Because it is a SIGN that someone does not believe the message that God is trying to deliver. "I am among you"... YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING! This is why there is confusion today. When people pray to themselves for their own edification in a service in tongues this is always permissable in scripture... but when a loud message goes forth that requires the meturganim (interpreter)... as a general rule... God have mercy on someone! God Bless and much brotherly love,-Robert

RobertW wrote: "Tongues in a public setting that requires an interpretation is generally a fearsome event if God is in it. The problem is that so many "God is among you" or "the Lord is in your midst" nonsensical interpretations of "messages in tongues" in a public setting have went forth that they very impact of the phenomena has been all but mocked."Reply: Well, Pastor John Lindell of James River A/G in Springfield Mo. used to think the same thing untill he invited a local Baptist minister to preach at his church. During the service there was a message given in tongues and the interpretation was a simple statement: "My people I love you." John was embarrassed. Here he had invited a local Baptist minister and here had to endure a false interpretation. After the service a Belgian lady who was visiting the U.S. came up to them to thank them for the touching service. But then she asked them, "Why did someone stand up and say 'My people I love you' in my language and then someone repeated it in English?"There's something totally different going on in 1st Corinthians. When Paul quotes Isaiah, he's quoting a judgement. The people of stammering lips were the Assyrians who were going to invade Israel. In Corinthian temples, people would work themselves into a frenzy and begin to speak in ecstatic language. This was a sign to "unbelievers" that their god was among them. But Paul said not so with believers. The Corinthian Christians were doing the same thing. Everyone would speak in tongues and to them, that was proof that God was among them. 1Cor 14:22 says, "Tongues, then,(here he is expounding on vs 21)are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers. However, two verses later he says in verse 24, "But if an unbeliever, or someone who does not understand comes in while everyone is prophesying, he will be conviced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, (25)and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"(exclamation in NIV text)So he appears to be saying that tongues are a sign for unbelievers, but then he appears to say that prophecy is a sign for unbelievers?He's not being critical of the unbelieving hearts of unbelievers in verse 22, he is saying that what is a sign in their religions that a god is among them is not to be emulated by the Church of the living God. Where they begin speaking in another tongue without hope of understanding(vs21), The Christian will be built up by an interpretation and prophecy. Personal tongues, Paul goes on to say, will edify the believer's life and is not to be avoided (I speak in tongues more than all of you as Paul said); however, according to chapter 13, we are to operate in love and love never puts itself first. In the light of that, a believer in a public setting will not seek to speak in tongues for himself, but will speak with an interpreter so that the whole body is edified. If a man is convicted of his sins and falls down and cries that God is truly among you, that's not judgement, that's salvation.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

Jack Hayford in his book "The Beauty of Spiritual Language" speaks of a similar xenoglosslalic situation when he was on an air plane speaking in tongues to an expert on native languages and the interpretation was concerning something to the effect "There is a light that comes down from above." Far be it from me to dispute this. Note my statement is "generally" this is by no means the rule- as we all as Pentecostals have seen this thing many times. However, at the same time when someone gets up and sounds off a "God is among you" interpratation when their is heavy conviction and that WAS NOT in fact what God was saying... where is the fear of God in this? Whom the Lord LOVETH He chasteneth and scourgeth every Son whom He receiveth. God is not a man that He would lie. It is a modern concept to tell-RATHER than show love. Friends, I fear for how this "God is chasing us madly in love- Song of Solomon" relationship with God when He is taking the posture of Revelation2-3. God help us realize He is still removing candlesticks. Beloved, I fear that the gifts of the Spirit have been so prostituted that the only message coming forth in many circles is "Blessings." In an atmosphere of secret sin and people trodding the courts of God lifting filthy hands to a Holy God? Minds full of adultery because they are filled with lewd images and CANNOT STOP sinning. Friends, when there is sin in the CAMP like we see it today... who will stand up with a word of REPENTANCE? As far as that goes the enemy can easily emulate this gift. How often really is it that God needs to use xenoglossolalia because there is a foreigner in our midst? And if one is not there the gift has to be being used to tell a message that would not be heard in the language that 100% of the people knew. I was just reading about this issue of glossolalia again and how many FALSE religions can do this- just day before yesterday in Zondervans new dictionary of Pentecostal and charismatic movements (though I already knew this). Beloved, when was the last time you heard an interpretation like this "This is your last chance to repent"? We recently had a situation in a church when that was the interpretation and a pastor got up and contradicted the message! Humanism has so userped the authority of God in the Church that we are near to where the Rabbi's were in 135 AD when they took over Judaism from God. God Bless and much brotherly Love,-Robert

RobertW wrote: "However, at the same time when someone gets up and sounds off a "God is among you" interpratation when their is heavy conviction and that WAS NOT in fact what God was saying... where is the fear of God in this?"Reply: Amen! I totally agree with you there. 1Cor. 14:29 "And if there are two or three prophets, let them speak, and let the others judge."We don't practice that last part at all, except in cases where you cited where someone prophesied a warning and the pastor shut it down. I've seen that happen before too and it's sad. Once during chapel at Bible school, my roommate interpreted a tongue that was to the effect: "I'm releasing funds, I'm giving you authority, You'll walk in power and respect." I knew the tongue was real, but the interpretation, well it was a sad one. Right after he finished the students started prasing God and the real interpretation came, but know one could hear it. I was completely disheartened. Then a young man in the balcony stood up and shouted at the top of his longs, "My people! My People! Be still!" I relaxed and knew that the real interpretation was coming. Then a young man prophesied an exhortation, and a mild rebuke to the chapel for not reaching out to the lost in the community when they were supposed to be there training to reach the lost.I was glad that there were students sensitive enough to God to listen and respond to a false interpretation. Unfortunately this often doesn't happen.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

Dear Bro. Jeremy,It sounds like there is a balance there in your life that I can appreciate. Pray for us in KC and those in our midst who are "prophets" that speak only blessings. God is going to awake and awaken them. Consider this passage a dear brother in the Lord sent me:Psalm 7865Then the Lord awoke as from sleep, Like a mighty man who shouts because of wine.66 And He beat back His enemies; He put them to a perpetual reproach.Tell me if thats not where we are in America and the Church! i have heard men say to me recently (just yesterday) that God was telling them that Sodom and Gomorrah is going to rise up in judgment against America! Who knows about that stuff? But it was a serious thought! We surely need to say "what saith the Lord" no matter if it is a loving word or a word of rebuke. It is not one or the other. We are really out of balance in Pentecostal/Charismatic circles though. God Bless you Brother! I sense a kindred Spirit.-Robert

thanks for all the comment,can i ask though,is not tongues directed Godward? and if so how can a interpretation of a tongue be "thus says the Lord"? surely this is a prophecy and time should be given for the tongue interpretationplease enlighten me guys,bless you,

When you pray in the Spirit you are praying to God. When you sing with the Spirit you are singing to God. When a person "gives a message in tongues" (as we say it in our circles as Pentecostals) they are giving a message from God that will require a God inspired interpretation. It is generally understood to be xenoglossolalic (one of the many languages on Earth). Usually the person will feel prompted by God to give the message (though the Spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet). They ARE NOT to give the message unless they are prepared to give the interpretation also. Messages without interpretations cause confusion and make people think their is madness present. Hope that helps, God Bless,-Robert

HiThis was originally a comment I supplied to another forum, but I wanted to repeat it here with reference to tongues as a 'sign to unbelievers'. You will see that this touches my understanding of the whole 'initial evidence' isse.On the basis of the above. This is not intended to be a full answer but just a start. tongues are for a sign, not them that believe, but to them that believe not 1 Cor 14:22 This follows a quotation from Isaiah 28. which says with men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people The question we have to answer is "a sign to whom?" Paul, quoting Isaiah, says this people that is to say the nation of Israel. Paul says the sign is to them that believe not If we put these two things together we discover that 'tongues were intended as a sign to unbelievers of the nation of Israel'. All Israel ought to have been believers, but they were not. Tongues was to be a sign to these 'unbelieving believers'! Does that interpretation check out from the scriptural record? Acts 2 is the first instance. More than 120 people were filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance The hearers said we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Some bible students have concluded that this must mean they were preaching in other languages, but if we read the record carefully we discover that it was Peter who did the preaching later, and it is almost certain that Peter preached in Greek so that all could understand him. So what were the people who were 'speaking with other tongues' saying? They were speaking about the wonderful works of God. This may well mean that they were not preaching but simply praising God, but in other languages. This 'sign' was very arresting for the pilgrims in Jerusalem, a multitude gathered together. This event stopped them in their tracks and forced them to ask a question. what meaneth this? This doesn't mean they couldn't understand what was being said, but rather than they wanted to understand the significance of the event. Why is this happening, what does it mean? Peter then preached and said the Spirits coming was in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and was proof that Jesus was alive and at His Father's right hand, and that is was Jesus who had made this event possible Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. When they heard this they were pricked in their heart... The sign of tongues had drawn a crown together of this people, the people of Israel, and provided an opportunity for Peter to preach the gospel. It was a proof to the hearers that God was doing what they saw happening. There's another example which is similar in some ways and very different in others. This is the events that happened in the home of Cornelius, the Gentile, in Acts 10. There were 7 witnesses to this event from this people, the people of Israel, they were Peter and 6 friends. (Acts 11:12) The early Christians were very reluctant to believe that God had included the Gentiles in His plans. We can see that from these two chapters in Acts 10 & 11. Peter himself seems confused by what is happening. He begins to explain the gospel to Cornelius, but still isn't really sure why he is there in Cornelius's house. The Holy Spirit suddenly (fell) came on everyone in the house. Peter and his friends were amazed. and they of the circumcision (this people,) which believed (they are Christian Jews now) were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. There are some important things to notice here. This was a spectacular sign to this people that God had included the Gentiles in His plans. God had 'proved' it to them by giving them exactly the same sign as He had given to the 120+ in that upper room. There could be no doubt now that God had also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. (Acts 11:1. To these 'unbelieving believers', from among the Jewish Christians, who didn't believe that God could save Gentiles, God had given that same unmistakable sign. Does this prove that all who receive the Spirit will speak with tongues? Not necessarily, it just shows that God used this sign for 'unbelievers'. Some say today that tongues are the sign of the coming of the Spirit. I don't believe this is true, and if it were it should only be a sign to 'unbelievers'. I don't think those who look for it 'as a sign' would like to think of themselves as unbelievers, but that would be the logical conclusion to that kind of thinking. Tongues were never designed to be a sign to the tongue-speaker, but only to unbelieving onlookers. There is one more occasion when those who received the Spirit spoke with tongues. Acts 19. As far as I can see this was not a sign to unbelievers although I do wonder just who these disciples of John were. Perhaps in this instance tongues were not a sign to the unbeliever but just a blessing that they received and Luke records. For myself, I believe God still comes in a conscious way by His Spirit, and when that happens people do often/sometimes speak in tongues. But it would be wrong to use tongues as a sign that someone had received the Spirit. That was never the purpose of tongues.

You make a good point. When Peter saw the same thing with the Gentiles as with the Jews it was evidence that God would allow the Gentiles to be partakers of the covenant. I say this: lets just preach repentance in a biblical fashion, baptize the people according to the word of God and let God do the infilling. Don't coerce the situation or try to manifest something... simply let those who repented know that there "be a Holy Ghost" (Acts 19) and see how they respond and what God will do.God Bless,-Robert

Robert writes When you pray in the Spirit you are praying to God. When you sing with the Spirit you are singing to God. When a person "gives a message in tongues" (as we say it in our circles as Pentecostals) they are giving a message from God that will require a God inspired interpretation.Robert, don't think we've met, HiI wonder if we would have come to this interpretation without the prior experience of a Pentecostal/Charismatic meeting? Paul certainly equates 'speaking in a tongue' with 'spirit-praying, spirit-singing, spirit-blessing' It's also very clear that Paul distinguishes between when 'my spirit prays - tongues' and 'my understanding prays'. In both instances the personal pronoun 'my' is used. This is Paul's mind and Paul's spirit we are hearing about.Delboy asked about the direction of such 'spirit' activity. From this little list of Paul's it is plainly 'Godwards'. Each one might be replicated with the 'understanding' and each one praying, singing, blessing as God at its focus. Pentecostals and Charismatics (and I have been both of those :-o ) frequently use the phrase 'a message in tongues' signifying a 'manwards' utterance in tongues which is subsequently interpreted. However, this phrase is not biblical but is really an explanation of a Pentecostal/Charismatic phenomena in which tongues plus interpretation seems to be equal to prophecy; ie manwards. As the source of this utterance is 'my spirit' is it likely that it would be manwards? There is no indication from Acts or 1 Corinthians that tongues is ever other than 'godwards'. I have an explanation for this, I wonder if you do?

Hey everyone this thread is really edifying and encouraging,Could we keep the replies titled instead of RE; it helps following, thanks say this: lets just preach repentance in a biblical fashion, baptize the people according to the word of God and let God do the infilling. Don't coerce the situation or try to manifest something... simply let those who repented know that there "be a Holy Ghost" (Acts 19) and see how they respond and what God will do.This is refreshing and coming from a pentecostal :-) Hi Robert thanks for your input.I dont think we should stray back to initial evidence that has been discussed very well recently,Rob have a look at it.certainly i must agree with Ron,tongues is GodwardAs the source of this utterance is 'my spirit' is it likely that it would be manwards? There is no indication from Acts or 1 Corinthians that tongues is ever other than 'godwards'. I have an explanation for this, I wonder if you do? Ron stop teasing what is your explanation,(methinks you have caught the 'Clutch'bug)