Do all Speak in Tongues?

I've been studying this topic of speaking in tongues since the last thread on it and here are some verses I've found.

"Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will."

"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way."

Clearly Paul is saying that not all speak in tongues.

Also,if you look in Acts there are several places were people receive the Spirit, but they didn't speak in tongues.

Jordan

I forgot to mention that those verses were from 1 Cor. 12.

1cor 14:4The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. 5Now 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.

Why does he say in verse 5 her wants them all to speak in tongues to build themselves up? Is this a different distinction from the utterance to edify the family that is being talked about in chapter 12?

1Co 14:1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
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.
6 ¶ Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
12 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.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15 ¶ What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21 ¶ 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.
22 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.
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
26 ¶ How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Also,if you look in Acts there are several places were people receive the Spirit, but they didn't speak in tongues.

Hey Brother, just wondering, what instances are you talking about? I completely agree with everything you're saying, but i was just wondering if you were thinking of any specific places where this happened.

least of all,
~vico

Hi Vico,

Here's one place:

Ac 8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

There were a couple more places, but I can't find them right now, so maybe I'll go back through Acts and see if I can find them. :-D

Jordan

Hi brethren,

Allow me to broaden this a bit, and interject a challenge. If you are going to use Acts 8 as a proof for what you are asserting, you need to consider the response of Simon the sorceror in verse 18 of the same chapter as well. When he "saw" that through the laying on of hands that the Holy Ghost was "given", he immediately offered money to the apostles, saying, in effect, "I also want this [i]power[/i] that on whomsoever I lay my hands the same kind of thing can happen." Those are my words, but go read the chapter and verse and you'll plainly see what he was after. Obviously, there was some kind of outer, dynamic demonstration of receiving the Holy Ghost that so bedazzled this "sorceror" - who was accustomed to "bewtiching" the people through his craft (see verse 9) - that he was impressed enough to offer the apostles money! I wonder what he saw (or heard) that spurred this impulse? Something to think about, in any case...

Another instance where a person recieved the Holy Spirit without a mentioning of tongues is found in the following chapter - Paul's own filling through the laying on of hands by Ananias. It's true that Luke doesn't mention Paul speaking in tongues...but Paul later wrote 1 Corintians 14:18, thanking God that he spoke in tongues more than the Corinthians. I believe he was referring here to his private devotional tongues (his prayer language) rather than the gift of tongues, for in verse 19 he says that he would rather speak five words with understanding than 1,000 words in a tongue. So, when did Paul begin to speak in tongues (his prayer language)? Could it be that he began when Ananias layed his hands upon him and he was filled? I think it makes reasonable sense, if we are following a curious pattern.

Also, it is worth mentioning that it was not always necessary for Luke to specify the details for each and every case in his historical account. We know this because he doesn't mention [i]water baptism[/i] each and every time he tells about people being added to the church.

In any case, I just wanted to give you a little bit more to chew on, a different perspective from me, a Pentecostal believer, who, though I can challenge and hold my own in this "tongue" issue, I have in the past few years come to believe that speaking in tongues is not the "only" sign of Spirit Baptism, nor is it an exclusive indicator.

Brother Paul

Hi Brother Paul,

Thanks for the food for thought.

My whole point with this thread is to show that tongues isn't the only way of knowing you're filled with the Spirit. I do believe that sometimes it can be, but to say that it always has to be just isn't biblical.

Jordan

My whole point with this thread is to show that tongues isn't the only way of knowing you're filled with the Spirit. I do believe that sometimes it can be, but to say that it always has to be just isn't biblical

I couldn't agree with you more! :-)

Brother Paul

No disagreement with you homefree.

However, I would like to point out, that regardless of the fact that not all speak in tongues, there are only two evidences of being filled with the Holy Spirit found in the scriptures.

One is tongues, the other is prophecy.

The Bible is to be the standard by which we both determine how we do things, and how we judge the results of what we do.

On the issue of speaking in tongues, the disciples knew that the gentiles were saved because they spoke in tongues just as the Apostles had.

That was their belief for knowing who had received the Spirit. Now, my case here is that that should be the standard, not the exception. Anyone who has any experience with tongues, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit knows, that sometimes things don't happen exactly the way it did with Peter and the gentiles.

But we are to maintain their belief as our standard, and make all other things submit to that, or be judged carefully by someone who has the wisdom necessary to do so.

Also, the only other evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is prophecy, so if the person does not speak in tongues, and does not prophecy, there is reason to doubt whether they are filled with the Holy Spirit.

Again, this is a standard, and all things are to be judged by it, there are exceptions, but the exceptions do not become the rule. I have seen cases where someone was prayed for one day with no evidences, and God encountered them three days later while they were alone, but then the evidence came, either one or both.

I have never seen a case where someone who was filled with the Spirit did not either speak in tongues, or prophecy.

Hope this adds to the discussion.

"However, I would like to point out, that regardless of the fact that not all speak in tongues, there are only two evidences of being filled with the Holy Spirit found in the scriptures.

One is tongues, the other is prophecy."

Hi Ben,

Were do you get that from the Bible? If you look at my first and second posts you see verses quoted that show more gifts then the two you mentioned.

Jordan

BenWilliams wrote:

However, I would like to point out, that regardless of the fact that not all speak in tongues, there are only two evidences of being filled with the Holy Spirit found in the scriptures.
One is tongues, the other is prophecy.

You couldn't be more wrong on this Ben. The only evidence that Apostle Paul says is true evidence of the Spirit is LOVE!

1 Cor 13:1-13

1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5 does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6 does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Gal 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Jordan Wrote:

Were do you get that from the Bible? If you look at my first and second posts you see verses quoted that show more gifts then the two you mentioned.

Hey Jordan, I am starting with the book of acts, from the day of pentecost onward. The only evidence found when someone is baptized in the Holy Spirit is that of speaking in tongues, and prophecy.

Now, to clarify so that no one is confused by this, those are the evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit. The other gifts that people receive from the Spirit, are not the evidence of it.

[b]To prove this point all you need to do is examine every account from acts onward where someone is filled with the Holy Spirit, and look at what the primary evidence of it is.[/b]

All the other giftings are evidence of themselves, for example. If you have the gift of healing, and you pray for someone to be healed, and that person is healed. If someone asks you why the person was healed, do you tell them it was because you are baptized in the Holy Spirit? I think not. It proves only that it is because God healed them, not that you were baptized in the Holy Spirit. But on the other hand, if you speak in tongues, and someone asks you why you speak in tongues, do you tell them it is because God spoke in tongues? I think not, it proves only to be because you were baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Bad example I know, but perhaps it will demonstrate the concept.

Now, back to examining the examples where people were baptized in the Holy Spirit, there are no instances where anyone received any other gifts that were immediately evidenced. Only prophecy, and tongues. Therefore, they are the immediate, exact evidence, and become the standard whereby we compare any subjective situation we find ourselves in.

Now to further clarify, the other gifts, are evidence of the Spirit, but not immediate evidence, and cannot be called a standard by which to judge a matter. Everything must be held up to the example that we have in scripture.

So if someone claims to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, but contains no evidence of either prophecy, or speaking in tongues. I have whereof to doubt them. That does not mean necessarily that they are not filled with the Holy Spirit, but it is how the matter should be judged.

iansmith Wrote:

You couldn't be more wrong on this Ben. The only evidence that Apostle Paul says is true evidence of the Spirit is LOVE!

iansmith, we are not discussing the fruit of the Spirit, we are discussing the Gift of tongues, and the evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

Show me a place in scripture where when someone was baptized in the Holy Spirit, they received the gift of love as evidence.

Also, read acts, and the account of Peter and Cornelius, and show me the part where Peter says that the reason they knew that the gentiles were saved was because of the great gift of love they received like the Apostles on the day of pentecost.

I am sorry for the sarchasm, but it was necessary to prove the point. Peter says that they knew the gentiles were saved [b][u]because they received the Spirit and spoke in tongues even as we did on the day of pentecost.[/u][/b]

I don't disagree, that you will be able to tell who has the Spirit by their love, but that is a fruit, not a gift, and absolutely not an immediate evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, as proved throughout the new testament.

If I was going to plant a church tomorrow and could pick my congregation, I'd pick 12 people who had hearts transformed by Jesus and full of love over 5000 that could speak in tongues and prophesy.

iansmith Wrote:

If I was going to plant a church tomorrow and could pick my congregation, I'd pick 12 people who had hearts transformed by Jesus and full of love over 5000 that could speak in tongues and prophesy.

No doubt, but we weren't discussing what people we would choose if we were gonna plant a church. Again this is off subject from the whole conversation. We are discussing a specific topic.

[b]Anyone who doesn't want to talk about it, shouldn't be posting in the thread.[/b]

Just some misc. comments/ thoughts on the tongues issue.

My understanding is that the gift of tongues and personal prayer language are two different things. Gift of tongues is a prophetic manifestation of the Holy Spirit and the prayer language is for personal communion with the Lord - praying for us when we know not how we should pray & edifying the inner man.

A couple of questions.
1. If the above is correct then every believer can pray in a prayer language, as all have received the Spirit?

2. If not, what is the spiritual gift that the Lord has given to those who do not have a personal prayer language to edify themselves?

ontheway

Krispy I believe your thought process on Paul "wishing" they could, would be out of context. "Wishing" (in the context your are putting it) is a thought foreign to Paul writings, unless he is calling the believers to something attainable (i.e.knowledge of Jesus). The words there could be "will" or "desire", but "wish" would not fit into Pauls usual thought process. And also his "rebuke" was to stop the chaos and bring about proper usage (edification of the family and the personal believer; which at face value is clearly brought out in Chapters 12-14), but Paul is not bashing toungues.
Peace out Bro Krisp