ken_sylvania wrote:
A couple of months ago at a baptismal service. Two brethren stood in the pulpit, one would say a phrase in an unknown tongue, then the other would interpret. For about 45 minutes.
This also happens regularly in some of our churches in Africa.
Are you speaking of languages known by some in this world that need interpretation phrase by phrase so they can be understood by those who don't speak that language ? If so, this doesn't seem to be the tongues said to be unknown in 1 Cor 14. If not, I find this quite interesting as I have never heard of this happening in a phrase by phrase way.
Unknown tongues are generally understood as 'heavenly utterances' not spoken anywhere on earth although I have heard of languages that are spoken on earth and understood by someone(s) in the congregation and are interpreted into the common language of the congregation.
I was raised in a church who often spoke in unknown tongues (no one hearing understood that tongue) and I am not convinced all of this was Holy Spirit directed. Especially when someone would follow up their own unknown tongues speaking with the basic same interpretation (message from God) every time. I think this is where the spiritual gift of discernment is needed.
Basically, outloud unknown tongues speaking in a church without interpretation of those tongues, I believe, Paul is saying they don't provide value for the congregation. In my background this was not adhered to by many.
Yes, I was referring to preaching in a language not understood by some or all of the congregation.
ken_sylvania wrote:
A couple of months ago at a baptismal service. Two brethren stood in the pulpit, one would say a phrase in an unknown tongue, then the other would interpret. For about 45 minutes.
This also happens regularly in some of our churches in Africa.
Are you speaking of languages known by some in this world that need interpretation phrase by phrase so they can be understood by those who don't speak that language ? If so, this doesn't seem to be the tongues said to be unknown in 1 Cor 14. If not, I find this quite interesting as I have never heard of this happening in a phrase by phrase way.
Unknown tongues are generally understood as 'heavenly utterances' not spoken anywhere on earth although I have heard of languages that are spoken on earth and understood by someone(s) in the congregation and are interpreted into the common language of the congregation.
I was raised in a church who often spoke in unknown tongues (no one hearing understood that tongue) and I am not convinced all of this was Holy Spirit directed. Especially when someone would follow up their own unknown tongues speaking with the basic same interpretation (message from God) every time. I think this is where the spiritual gift of discernment is needed.
Basically, outloud unknown tongues speaking in a church without interpretation of those tongues, I believe, Paul is saying they don't provide value for the congregation. In my background this was not adhered to by many.
The word unknown in 1 Corinthians 14 is in italics in the KJV meaning it is an added word...
ken_sylvania wrote:
A couple of months ago at a baptismal service. Two brethren stood in the pulpit, one would say a phrase in an unknown tongue, then the other would interpret. For about 45 minutes.
This also happens regularly in some of our churches in Africa.
Are you speaking of languages known by some in this world that need interpretation phrase by phrase so they can be understood by those who don't speak that language ? If so, this doesn't seem to be the tongues said to be unknown in 1 Cor 14. If not, I find this quite interesting as I have never heard of this happening in a phrase by phrase way.
Unknown tongues are generally understood as 'heavenly utterances' not spoken anywhere on earth although I have heard of languages that are spoken on earth and understood by someone(s) in the congregation and are interpreted into the common language of the congregation.
I was raised in a church who often spoke in unknown tongues (no one hearing understood that tongue) and I am not convinced all of this was Holy Spirit directed. Especially when someone would follow up their own unknown tongues speaking with the basic same interpretation (message from God) every time. I think this is where the spiritual gift of discernment is needed.
Basically, outloud unknown tongues speaking in a church without interpretation of those tongues, I believe, Paul is saying they don't provide value for the congregation. In my background this was not adhered to by many.
The word unknown in 1 Corinthians 14 is in italics in the KJV meaning it is an added word...
Who added it?
So otherwise it would be he who speaks in a tongue-
My uneducated/uninformed guess is the reason they would have added 'unknown' is to keep the distinction between
the two kinds of tongues-
1 Corinthians 13:1
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”
King James Version (KJV)
In 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to imply the 'tongue of angels' as opposed to 'the tongue of men'
Sudsy wrote:
Are you speaking of languages known by some in this world that need interpretation phrase by phrase so they can be understood by those who don't speak that language ? If so, this doesn't seem to be the tongues said to be unknown in 1 Cor 14. If not, I find this quite interesting as I have never heard of this happening in a phrase by phrase way.
Unknown tongues are generally understood as 'heavenly utterances' not spoken anywhere on earth although I have heard of languages that are spoken on earth and understood by someone(s) in the congregation and are interpreted into the common language of the congregation.
I was raised in a church who often spoke in unknown tongues (no one hearing understood that tongue) and I am not convinced all of this was Holy Spirit directed. Especially when someone would follow up their own unknown tongues speaking with the basic same interpretation (message from God) every time. I think this is where the spiritual gift of discernment is needed.
Basically, outloud unknown tongues speaking in a church without interpretation of those tongues, I believe, Paul is saying they don't provide value for the congregation. In my background this was not adhered to by many.
The word unknown in 1 Corinthians 14 is in italics in the KJV meaning it is an added word...
Who added it?
So otherwise it would be he who speaks in a tongue-
My uneducated/uninformed guess is the reason they would have added 'unknown' is to keep the distinction between
the two kinds of tongues-
1 Corinthians 13:1
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”
King James Version (KJV)
In 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to imply the 'tongue of angels' as opposed to 'the tongue of men'
The KJV translators added it as far as I have been told.
Saying it implies "tongues of angels" is something I am not ready to just assume about.
Wade wrote:
The word unknown in 1 Corinthians 14 is in italics in the KJV meaning it is an added word...
Who added it?
So otherwise it would be he who speaks in a tongue-
My uneducated/uninformed guess is the reason they would have added 'unknown' is to keep the distinction between
the two kinds of tongues-
1 Corinthians 13:1
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”
King James Version (KJV)
In 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to imply the 'tongue of angels' as opposed to 'the tongue of men'
The KJV translators added it as far as I have been told.
Saying it implies "tongues of angels" is something I am not ready to just assume about.
What do you think Apostle Paul meant by tongues of angels in 1 Corinthians 13?
Remember, he was caught up into the third heaven and heard more than the average Christian- but he does make the distinction that there are two types of tongues for sure.
Valerie wrote:
Who added it?
So otherwise it would be he who speaks in a tongue-
My uneducated/uninformed guess is the reason they would have added 'unknown' is to keep the distinction between
the two kinds of tongues-
1 Corinthians 13:1
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”
King James Version (KJV)
In 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to imply the 'tongue of angels' as opposed to 'the tongue of men'
The KJV translators added it as far as I have been told.
Saying it implies "tongues of angels" is something I am not ready to just assume about.
What do you think Apostle Paul meant by tongues of angels in 1 Corinthians 13?
Remember, he was caught up into the third heaven and heard more than the average Christian- but he does make the distinction that there are two types of tongues for sure.
I think he meant angels have their own language(s) and I accept that it(they) is(are) "unknown" to us. That doesn't mean I automatically assume an unknown tongue is from angels, nor would I assume it was from demons but I can't really say it is from neither... Demons must also have an unknown tongue too...
The part that trips me up with the whole gifts of the Spirit charismatic ideas is that I don't believe that the Spirit works the gifts ever apart from the fruits. So when someone is fully showing the fruit of the Spirit I would be more inclined to accept they possess a gift as well. Just like the other thread it is something I am yet to see in people so persistent to advocate for a certain idea - not saying that it doesn't exist at all but please show me the fruit.
Wade wrote:
The KJV translators added it as far as I have been told.
Saying it implies "tongues of angels" is something I am not ready to just assume about.
What do you think Apostle Paul meant by tongues of angels in 1 Corinthians 13?
Remember, he was caught up into the third heaven and heard more than the average Christian- but he does make the distinction that there are two types of tongues for sure.
I think he meant angels have their own language(s) and I accept that it(they) is(are) "unknown" to us. That doesn't mean I automatically assume an unknown tongue is from angels, nor would I assume it was from demons but I can't really say it is from neither... Demons must also have an unknown tongue too...
The part that trips me up with the whole gifts of the Spirit charismatic ideas is that I don't believe that the Spirit works the gifts ever apart from the fruits. So when someone is fully showing the fruit of the Spirit I would be more inclined to accept they possess a gift as well. Just like the other thread it is something I am yet to see in people so persistent to advocate for a certain idea - not saying that it doesn't exist at all but please show me the fruit.
Well the teaching of the gifts of the Spirit is predominantly in Corinthians (although you read about it through the book of Acts as well)- when you read about the 'gifts' of the spirit in Corinthians, Apostle Paul was pleased with their zeal for the gifts of the Spirit but he was also admonishing the Corinthian Church in a number of areas as well. This tells us that the gifts can be given to 'imperfect' Christians- they are to glorify Go and edify the Church. I agree that the fruit is extremely important & I am not one to assume if they have encourage the gifts, they lack the fruit- Apostle Paul is the one who encouraged us to desire the gifts- not fruitless men- it is Apostolic teaching then. I suppose because I have known many Christians that have the gifts and also the fruit it bothers me when people assume it's one or the other- but again the gifts were alive and well in an imperfect Church (Corinthians). My hope and desire would be that both sides of this in Christianity would reach across the aisles in acceptance.
Valerie wrote:
What do you think Apostle Paul meant by tongues of angels in 1 Corinthians 13?
Remember, he was caught up into the third heaven and heard more than the average Christian- but he does make the distinction that there are two types of tongues for sure.
I think he meant angels have their own language(s) and I accept that it(they) is(are) "unknown" to us. That doesn't mean I automatically assume an unknown tongue is from angels, nor would I assume it was from demons but I can't really say it is from neither... Demons must also have an unknown tongue too...
The part that trips me up with the whole gifts of the Spirit charismatic ideas is that I don't believe that the Spirit works the gifts ever apart from the fruits. So when someone is fully showing the fruit of the Spirit I would be more inclined to accept they possess a gift as well. Just like the other thread it is something I am yet to see in people so persistent to advocate for a certain idea - not saying that it doesn't exist at all but please show me the fruit.
Well the teaching of the gifts of the Spirit is predominantly in Corinthians (although you read about it through the book of Acts as well)- when you read about the 'gifts' of the spirit in Corinthians, Apostle Paul was pleased with their zeal for the gifts of the Spirit but he was also admonishing the Corinthian Church in a number of areas as well. This tells us that the gifts can be given to 'imperfect' Christians- they are to glorify Go and edify the Church. I agree that the fruit is extremely important & I am not one to assume if they have encourage the gifts, they lack the fruit- Apostle Paul is the one who encouraged us to desire the gifts- not fruitless men- it is Apostolic teaching then. I suppose because I have known many Christians that have the gifts and also the fruit it bothers me when people assume it's one or the other- but again the gifts were alive and well in an imperfect Church (Corinthians). My hope and desire would be that both sides of this in Christianity would reach across the aisles in acceptance.
My opinion on this is that we need to go to the Scriptures to decide doctrine. While in prison Paul says that some people were actually preaching the Gospel in hopes that it would somehow make it more difficult for Paul, but whether that was to make him jealous of their freedom, or to create a stir politically that would make the authorities less likely to treat him well, he still rejoiced that the truth was being proclaimed.
0 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
