Gift of Tongues

[Didi]

St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11:

“To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.”

and later in verses 27-31:

“Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.”

So, every person does not receive the gift of tongues, because we all have different gifts. We should pray for those gifts that the Spirit desires to give us and not be seeking something for our own glory or to “fit in” to a group. We should also not demand anything of God, but ask with sincerity of heart, always praying “Thy will be done.”

I think too much emphasis is placed on tongues in many charismatic groups. In fact, in the second passage, the gift of tongues is mentioned last in importance, after apostles, prophets, teachers, healers. etc.

St Paul goes on to say in the very next Chapter, 13, verse 1:

"If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging symbol."

Seems to me that love is the greatest gift of all. If others make you feel less important, or less spiritual because you do not have the gift of tongues, that is not being very loving or charitable.

 

[freshwater]

Hi DiDi,thankyou for putting these passages here for all to see,i loved reading them.Hugs,Blessings,freshwater

 

[lencloud]

Speaking in tongues issues has confused many of my protestant friends and then too be part of the team they rattle some empty words to be part of the church community. Love is the most important gift and most of us are still working and always will be working on Love. So, why bother with tongues that other people cannot understand.

 

[freshwater]

Hi,i guess why bother is because God gave some this gift,and some to interpete to some also.Any gift God is giveing is a reason to bother with it .Thats how i look at it.IF you are given a gift from God,its for a reason.IF you are not effected by this ,then i guess it wouldn’t be a bother to that specific person?right?Blessings,peace to you,freshwater

 

[DaMaMaXiMuS]

I posted in this thread previously.

I had stated how after reading what was being discussed on this thread concerning tongues, I reflected on scriptures such as Acts 2 and 1st Cor. 14, realized something that I had never realized before.

Basically I pointed out how in Acts 2 it never mentions that there was interpreter, whereas in 1st Cor. 14 it clearly says that an interpreter was necessary for edification. Therefore, my thinking was that there seems to be 2 forms of tongues. If you scroll up on the thread you’ll see the post I’m speaking of.

But something new became apparent to me. It may have been obvious to many other people already, but it truly hadn’t been to me.

In Acts. 2, we start to read from verse one, but need to read straight to verse 15. Verses 13-15 are of great importance.

Acts 2:*13, “*But others mocking, said: These men are full of new wine. 14 But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you, and with your ears receive my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day:”

When some of the people who where present it said they began to mock the disciples whom had received the Holy Spirit and began to speak in tongues, and thought that the apostles where full of wine, meaning drunk. We know this because Peter said they are not drunk as some had supposed.

So anyway I meditated more on this and wait a minute. Why would those people say the apostles where drunk if indeed they speaking a another language that they hadn’t ever learned or spoken before. You know what I mean, if the disciples spoke and knew only hebrew, after receiving the Holy Spirit and the gift of tongues, they could now speak say parthian, or the language of the medes, etc. I mean this is what I used believe was the gift of tongues.

So then, why say, “these men are full of new wine”. Which obviously meant to Peter that people were calling the disciples drunks. If you think about a drunk, rarely are you able to understand them. Their speech is slurred, they may mumble, etc. The point being people can not understand them usually.

Which must have been the case in Acts 2. I think I was wrong in the previous post I put up on this thread. I think now that when the disciples received the gift of tongues when the Holy Spirit came down at pentecost, some people where able to understand what was coming out of the disciples mouths in their native languages, while others could not understand anything, and assumed the disciples where drunk.

If this is right, then I see that Acts 2 directly correlates with 1st. Cor. 14. The gift of tongues was something where unless you were blessed to understand it in your own native language, it would sound like some unintelligable babble to you unless there was one present who had to gift to interpret what was being said.

Another thing I noticed, in 1st Cor. 13:1 Paul says, “If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” I assume speaking with the tongues of men is talking about speaking in different languages, for ex. spanish, french, russian, or whatever where the predominate languages on the time.

But what does Paul mean by, “speak with the tongues of angels”? I know angel means messenger and at times is referring to leaders over the different churches, for ex. the churches in asia minor read about in Revelations. But here in 1st Cor. 13:1, the referrence to Angels seems to be speaking of the Angelic beings.

What you guys think? Please take a look at this. Like I started off, I’m certain I’m not discovering the wheel or anything, but it’s something I never saw before.

I still would like to know what the church officially teaches on this? At one time in the church I was a part of, we taught that gifts like speaking in tongues, which we said was only referring to speaking in another language, were gifts that were only for the time period of the Apostles. I lwould ike to learn more also about the Charismatic Catholic.

So if anyone could please post some resources on this I would appreciate it.

Nelson

 

[Didi]

DaMaMaXiMuS:

But what does Paul mean by, “speak with the tongues of angels”? I know angel means messenger and at times is referring to leaders over the different churches, for ex. the churches in asia minor read about in Revelations. But here in 1st Cor. 13:1, the referrence to Angels seems to be speaking of the Angelic beings. Nelson

The Jerome Bibilical Commentary says that Paul means all possible tongues or languages, including the gift of tongues.

I think, in essence, he is saying there is no greater language than than of love. Words can be empty, but loving actions say so much more than words in any kind of language.