Only 2 types of tongues not 3

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If it is then 1 Corinthians 12:30 says not all have the gift of tongues. You believe all do have the prayer language, which you are claiming is part of the gift of tongues. See the contradiction?

No, I already said that it is possible for this to be solely speaking of the gift of tongues, since not everyone needs the prayer language because there are other ways the Spirit intercedes for us to pray when we do not know how to pray.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Why not say the gift of tongues is BOTH a prayer language and precursor to interpretation of tongues?

Originally Posted by mfblume

No, I already said that it is possible for this to be solely speaking of the gift of tongues, since not everyone needs the prayer language because there are other ways the Spirit intercedes for us to pray when we do not know how to pray.

What I'm saying is this verse should not be used to establish a personal prayer language. You say you agree but keep on going back to this verse as evidence of a personal prayer language. That's what doesn't make sense to me.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You didn't go further when it says, "...do all interpret?" Tongues and interpretation, as a spiritual gift, must operate in unison. So, I must view them together. That is much different than speaking in tongues where you are speaking to yourself and to God as per I Cor 14:2 which is supported in I Cor 14:28. The person in verse 28 is using his personal edification in the wrong way by appearing that he has the tongues for an interpretation to go forth. He needs to remain silent in that case, speaking to himself and to God. Verse 2 shows how he does that.

Tongues is a gift of the Spirit. This gift of the spirit seems to be able to occur with and without interpretation as in 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 14:4.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You seem to be viewing I Cor 12:30 as saying that some will not speak in tongues at all. That is evidence of the Holy Ghost infilling, so it stands to reason, that wouldn't make sense. Paul says in I Cor 14:8, "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more (to a greater degree) than you all." What he is trying to do in I Cor 14 is to admonish them to desire to seek spiritual gifts and not to be satisfied with just speaking in tongues during the services. Anyone can do that, but it edifies no one but the person speaking.

1 Corinthians 12:30 does indeed say that not all will have the gift of tongues. Using 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 14:4 to show that there was a private prayer language of tongues links that private prayer language to the gift of tongues. The tongues in those verses can be interpreted. As such they are referring to the gift of tongues. Since you have used those verses to refer to the gift of tongues I am simply applying 1 Corinthians 12:30 that not all have the gift of tongues. In light of this in 1 Corinthians 12:30 it seems the gift of tongues can be used with or without interpretation.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

He leads into chapter 14 with chapter 13 by showing that if love is not at the center - it is a sounding brass (roaring noise) or a tinkling (wailing) cymbal. In other words, it means nothing and is just a bunch of noise.

He ends the chapter with I Cor 39-40 "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. (40) Let all things be done decently and in order.

He never implies that people will not speak in tongues. He rather encourages it, if done decent and in order.

He implied not all speak with the gift tongues in 1 corinthians 12:30. Note I have not said nothing about the initial evidence of tongues. I have seperated that from the gift of tongues being discussed in 1 Corinthians.

[jfrog]

I'm starting to think the best way to read the passage is as the gift of tongues being responsible for the private prayer language and messages in tongues (when interpretation is present) Though this implies that not all will have a private prayer language in tongues.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by jfrog

What I'm saying is this verse should not be used to establish a personal prayer language. You say you agree but keep on going back to this verse as evidence of a personal prayer language.

A personal prayer language to those who have the gift.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I'm starting to think the best way to read the passage is as the gift of tongues being responsible for the private prayer language and messages in tongues (when interpretation is present) Though this implies that not all will have a private prayer language in tongues.

That is what I have been trying to say may be the case.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by mfblume

That is what I have been trying to say may be the case.

Sorry then. I should stop assuming things! I was assuming that you would find it impossible to reconcile that with the pentecostal experience where everyone seems to have a private prayer language.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Tongues is a gift of the Spirit. This gift of the spirit seems to be able to occur with and without interpretation as in 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 14:4.



1 Corinthians 12:30 does indeed say that not all will have the gift of tongues. Using 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 14:4 to show that there was a private prayer language of tongues links that private prayer language to the gift of tongues. The tongues in those verses can be interpreted. As such they are referring to the gift of tongues. Since you have used those verses to refer to the gift of tongues I am simply applying 1 Corinthians 12:30 that not all have the gift of tongues. In light of this in 1 Corinthians 12:30 it seems the gift of tongues can be used with or without interpretation.



He implied not all speak with the gift tongues in 1 corinthians 12:30. Note I have not said nothing about the initial evidence of tongues. I have seperated that from the gift of tongues being discussed in 1 Corinthians.

Yes, Paul does say that they don't all speak with the gift of tongues, which is coupled with interpretation. I only separate that from the tongues you have received with the initial infilling of the Holy Ghost and, IMO, that is where your personal edification and prayer comes from. I view that as separate or a different mode of operation from the "spiritual gifts" that are used to edify the church.

Everyone that has been filled with the Holy Ghost has a prayer. That is separate from the spiritual gifts.

Paul does instruct the church to "desire" spiritual gifts. That is a strong and passionate word! It means to be "jealous", "zealous" and "covet earnestly".

So, IMO, just because he says that not everyone has the "gift of tongues", he goes on in I Cor 14:1 to admonish and instruct them to seek after those gifts that are lacking your life!

IMO, it would be erroneous and unfortunate to settle, rest and be satisfied that some do not speak in tongues.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Yes, Paul does say that they don't all speak with the gift of tongues, which is coupled with interpretation. I only separate that from the tongues you have received with the initial infilling of the Holy Ghost and, IMO, that is where your personal edification and prayer comes from. I view that as separate or a different mode of operation from the "spiritual gifts" that are used to edify the church.

Everyone that has been filled with the Holy Ghost has a prayer. That is separate from the spiritual gifts.

Paul does instruct the church to "desire" spiritual gifts. That is a strong and passionate word! It means to be "jealous", "zealous" and "covet earnestly".

So, IMO, just because he says that not everyone has the "gift of tongues", he goes on in I Cor 14:1 to admonish and instruct them to seek after those gifts that are lacking your life!

IMO, it would be erroneous and unfortunate to settle, rest and be satisfied that some do not speak in tongues.

You cannot prove what is bolded scripturally without quoting passages that must be attributed to being about the gift of tongues.

Your idea that it is only the gift of tongues when there is interpretation fails because 1 Corinthians 14:2 is about the gift of tongues. He is comparing it to prohecy (another spiritual gift) and further in verse one he even says he is speaking about spiritual gifts.

EDIT: I wanted to note again that I am not saying those filled with the Holy Ghost do not all speak in tongues, only that a private prayer language carrying over from that cannot be found in the bible.

[jfrog]

Pressing, on the other thread you said you believed this: If the gift of tongues refers to a natural language that God imbues the person with that he can use in various ways then your explanation is the only one that makes sense.

Since the gift of tongues refers to that, how can you say in this thread that it only refers to the gift of tongues when interpretation is present.