Quote:
Originally Posted by returnman
I believe there is a genuine practice of speaking in tongues but after almost 30 years in and around every facet of UPC, oneness apostolic churches I concluded that about 90% was conjured up emotion usually brought on with a lot of loud driven music.
|
I tend to agree. As did Paul. Preachers want to speak in tongues as a means to impress, or so it seems. They routinely do so without any expectation of an interpretation. Paul has this to say . . .
“He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.”
I think a lot of preachers speak in tongues during their message solely for their own edification.
“ 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.”
There’s a lot of tongues spoken with zero interpretation. It has become an expected event. There is often no expectation of being understood.
“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.”
Is it better to speak in an unknown language (when speaking to the church) or would we be better off speaking in a plain, easily understood language? Paul has this to say . . .
[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.
Paul told them that he spoke in tongues more than all of them. It makes me wonder, why did he have to tell them? Because he was speaking in tongues when he was praying alone, perhaps?
Speaking in tongues is coveted more than receiving the Holy Ghost in many cases. The evidence of the Gift is sought more fervently than the Gift. It’s a small wonder that some charismatic churches teach classes in how to speak in tongues, and stage messages in tongues and interpretation. I likely could leave out the word “charismatic” in the sentence above and just put churches instead, because I’ve noticed many Apostolic and or Pentecostal churches doing the same.
My opinion is that tongues should be evidence of, or the result of, the Spirit. It should not be the tongues that are sought. The Spirit is actually what is uttering the words (as the Spirit gave them utterance).
During preaching, when we are delivering a message, we should refrain from speaking in tongues unless there is interpretation forthcoming. Tongues in this context serve no purpose.