We have to examine the first place speaking in tongues happened in the bible act 1: 13. They spoke in tongues and even unbelievers and people from far away country could understand them.

All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language?

Harshirama:

How sir? It's obvious the gifts are the abilities or faculties of the spirit. If they are of the spirit and you have the spirit, you have the gifts in you already. It's simple deduction. Having however does not equal manifestation, which is why many christians don't. Same way all christians have the spirit and not all christians show the fruit of the spirit.

No, having the spirit doesn't equally means u av the gifts of the HolySpirit. the fruits of the HolySpirit and the gifts of the HolySpirit aren't the same. All christians have the Spirit but not all christians have the gifts of the HolySpirit.

Truvelisback:
No, having the spirit doesn't equally means u av the gifts of the HolySpirit. the fruits of the HolySpirit and the gifts of the HolySpirit aren't the same. All christians have the Spirit but not all christians have the gifts of the HolySpirit.

I know the gifts and fruits are different. I was only citing them as an example. But they are both works of the spirit. I think the main issue here is how you are seeing the word "gift". The gifts refer to abilities and faculties, not like a present or something you have to pray for. If you want to get more information, just study the book of acts and you'll see. The holy spirit is not separate from his gifts, and the holy spirit is not separate from the believer.

Harshirama:


Why? To prove the scriptures are true?

Yes. I really would like to hear what it's like.

pakirisuitesphc:
Dear brothers and sisters,[a] if I should come to you speaking in an unknown language,[b] how would that help you? But if I bring you a revelation or some special knowledge or prophecy or teaching, that will be helpful.
Most pentecostal Christians can open their mouths and speak in tongues but you hardly see those who can interprete among them. Please I want Christians in the house to contribute and no derogatory contribution please.
If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages.

Disobedience and flesh. Many people just want to speak in tongues for show off, not to edify any other person.

pakirisuitesphc:
Dear brothers and sisters,[a] if I should come to you speaking in an unknown language,[b] how would that help you? But if I bring you a revelation or some special knowledge or prophecy or teaching, that will be helpful.
Most pentecostal Christians can open their mouths and speak in tongues but you hardly see those who can interprete among them. Please I want Christians in the house to contribute and no derogatory contribution please.
If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages.

You will need to read all of 1 Cor 14 to understand what Paul is saying. You only quoted a part and that can change the true intent of the author.

1. Paul, in all of his writings, never taught tongues as human language

2. Interpretation of tongue is a spiritual exercise, an activity in/from/of the spirit which man should function in.

3. This activities/gifts must be taught, recognized and practiced by believers (church) before you can see it dominant in among them.

So the reason you may see a place where tongue is dominant and interpretation isn't is because of lack of the teaching of the same as gift of the Spirit available for the believer.

LordReed:


That is because speaking in tongues or glossolalia is not a spiritual gift, it's just something we humans can do, like a baby trying to talk and forming syllables from what it has heard around it. There is nothing to interpret.

Here again?

Yes it is glossolalia. Which can be "to speak in tongues". But you didn't read it whole, if you do you will see how Paul intelligently clear that for you to show the different from what you speak and what he is saying.


He called it

glossolalia 1 Cor 14:2
proseuchomai pnema 1 Cor 14:15
eulogeō pneuma 1 Cor 14:16

He said the glossolalia he is speaking about comes from the spirit.

Pray with/in the spirit
Bless with/in the spirit

Is what he called speaking in tongues.

So that is the distinction from your illustration.

bmdmix11:
stop lying none of u do u can't, u just yapping rubbish.


if they put u n another tongue yapping in different n tell u both to translate what u said in English n what d other is saying u both will either bite ur tongue or conclude that d other isn't speaking in tongue

Is this the tongue the OP is referencing? Paul never taught this.

Harshirama:

1 Corinthians 12:8-10
[8]For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
[9]To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
[10]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:

1 Corinthians 14:26
[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.

Lol, will you ask me to send my BVN and password too? They were personal issues I never told anyone. I also have received instructions and prophecies from the spirit of God for people through prophecy

I don't see how these verses answer my question to you....

What is it that you are "ministering" to other believers that the one who is their Teacher -Matthew 23 vs 8 - is unable to teach them directly as He stated He would - Matthew 13 vs 12 ? You claim to minister to those who believe, what and how?

Kindly give us an example of what you have infact been able to interpret so far?

What are some of these things you claim people have been able to tell you via this medium?

I don't agree with you, speaking out anything can be
done easily, I have seen a place where a man of God was describing people who didn't speak in tongues after he laid hand on them as not serious or ready. So for some to escape the embarrassment, they opened their mouths and uttered something whether real or fake, nobody there to interprete

hupernikao:



You will need to read all of 1 Cor 14 to understand what Paul is saying. You only quoted a part and that can change the true intent of the author.

1. Paul, in all of his writings, never taught tongues as human language

2. Interpretation of tongue is a spiritual exercise, an activity in/from/of the spirit which man should function in.

3. This activities/gifts must be taught, recognized and practiced by believers (church) before you can see it dominant in among them.

So the reason you may see a place where tongue is dominant and interpretation isn't is because of lack of the teaching of the same as gift of the Spirit available for the believer.

hupernikao:





Here again?

Yes it is glossolalia. Which can be "to speak in tongues". But you didn't read it whole, if you do you will see how Paul intelligently clear that for you to show the different from what you speak and what he is saying.


He called it

glossolalia 1 Cor 14:2
proseuchomai pnema 1 Cor 14:15
eulogeō pneuma 1 Cor 14:16

He said the glossolalia he is speaking about comes from the spirit.

Pray with/in the spirit
Bless with/in the spirit

Is what he called speaking in tongues.

So that is the distinction from your illustration.

Record an audio file and post it here to show the difference.

LordReed:


Record an audio file and post it here to show the difference.

If Paul taught us to act like that, I would have done it for you. But he never did.

pakirisuitesphc:
I don't agree with you, speaking out anything can be
done easily, I have seen a place where a man of God was describing people who didn't speak in tongues after he laid hand on them as not serious or ready. So for some to escape the embarrassment, they opened their mouths and uttered something whether real or fake, nobody there to interprete

I am not speaking about what one man said. I am referencing what was taught in the Bible Sir. Anyone can insert his opinion but the scriptures is the authority. It's not subject to agreement, it's God's word and not human opinion.

So when we look at it and get the authors intent, we have no choice than to adhere to it.

Paul in the scriptures never taught tongues as human language. This can't change no matter how badly people have manipulated it to suit their purpose or falsely interpreted it. He taught tongues as spiritual gifts that is not known in human mind.

hupernikao:


If Paul taught us to act like that, I would have done it for you. But he never did.

LMFAO! Don't you just love how all methods of validating the truth of you people's claims are actively resisted. Bwahahahahahaha!

LordReed:


LMFAO! Don't you just love how all methods of validating the truth of you people's claims are actively resisted. Bwahahahahahaha!

Methods are subjective to the willingness of the individual. What governs us differs. I am trained and taught to know that some things don't require distribution or noise making.

Do you want me to neglect my training to please you? I am sure you don't. So, like I said, I wasn't trained or taught from the scriptures to do so.

What I expect you to try and debunk is if I am lying about what scriptures taught me on showing off what you asked. If am not lying, then you don't have to make a man neglect his training to please you by giving you your desire.


So, like I said. the scriptures taught about tongues and praying in the spirit, I have shown you that from the same scriptures you referred earlier.

And the scriptures also taught on how we relate with it as regarding trying to please another by showing off.

This is the point.

hupernikao:


Methods are subjective to the willingness of the individual. What governs us differs. I am trained and taught to know that some things don't require distribution or noise making.

Do you want me to neglect my training to please you? I am sure you don't. So, like I said, I wasn't trained or taught from the scriptures to do so.

What I expect you to try and debunk is if I am lying about what scriptures taught me on showing off what you asked. If am not lying, then you don't have to make a man neglect his training to please you by giving you your desire.


So, like I said. the scriptures taught about tongues and praying in the spirit, I have shown you that from the same scriptures you referred earlier.

And the scriptures also taught on how we relate with it as regarding trying to please another by showing off.

This is the point.

How can I debunk your statement when there is nothing to debunk? If you had agreed I also would have recorded myself speaking in tongues so that we can compare how different or similar they are.

Someone tells you "I have a golden toilet" you ask him for a photo of the toilet and he tells you "nope I am trained to not take photos of toilets". You then tell him well too bad I don't believe you and he says why don't you debunk his statement first. Did he give you anything to debunk?

How are you showing off? Is there a prize to be won or is this for bragging rights? You are proving what you said as correct where is the commandment that says you shouldn't do so?

LordReed:


How can I debunk your statement when there is nothing to debunk? If you had agreed I also would have recorded myself speaking in tongues so that we can compare how different or similar they are.

Someone tells you "I have a golden toilet" you ask him for a photo of the toilet and he tells you "nope I am trained to not take photos of toilets". You then tell him well too bad I don't believe you and he says why don't you debunk his statement first. Did he give you anything to debunk?

How are you showing off? Is there a prize to be won or is this for bragging rights? You are proving what you said as correct where is the commandment that says you shouldn't do so?

1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

i guess this is what he is trying to say. If he can't interpret, he's to speak to himself and to God. He's not even supposed to speak up in church not to talk of to an unbeliever or public forum. The funny thing though is that most who disobey and still speak in church will suddenly be shy to speak it to you.

LordReed:


How can I debunk your statement when there is nothing to debunk? If you had agreed I also would have recorded myself speaking in tongues so that we can compare how different or similar they are.

Someone tells you "I have a golden toilet" you ask him for a photo of the toilet and he tells you "nope I am trained to not take photos of toilets". You then tell him well too bad I don't believe you and he says why don't you debunk his statement first. Did he give you anything to debunk?

How are you showing off? Is there a prize to be won or is this for bragging rights? You are proving what you said as correct where is the commandment that says you shouldn't do so?

You have forgotten the beginning of discussion. You were the one who referenced the scripture. And I corrected it. I am not here to control what you believe or don't believe. I never put anything up for you to believe. The Bible is there if you need believing. I only pointed you to how you have missed interpreted the scriptures. This is the focus.

If you now want a prove of the discussion, you may need to then still show me from the same scriptures where I am instructed to obey such request as yours. If not, I won't measure my obedience with what you feel.

So, the point here is that Paul in the scriptures taught tongues as not human language, he called it praying in the spirit, blessing in the spirit. This is what you omitted or didn't see in your very first response.

So, this shouldn't be an argument as your basis of correcting the OP you quoted was misinterpretation of scriptures. And that is what I corrected you on, that the scriptures taught it.

The issue of believing it or not is now secondary, and that's individual responsibility.

hupernikao:



You have forgotten the beginning of discussion. You were the one who referenced the scripture. And I corrected it. I am not here to control what you believe or don't believe. I never put anything up for you to believe. The Bible is there if you need believing. I only pointed you to how you have missed interpreted the scriptures. This is the focus.

If you now want a prove of the discussion, you may need to then still show me from the same scriptures where I am instructed to obey such request as yours. If not, I won't measure my obedience with what you feel.

So, the point here is that Paul in the scriptures taught tongues as not human language, he called it praying in the spirit, blessing in the spirit. This is what you omitted or didn't see in your very first response.

So, this shouldn't be an argument as your basis of correcting the OP you quoted was misinterpretation of scriptures. And that is what I corrected you on, that the scriptures taught it.

The issue of believing it or not is now secondary, and that's individual responsibility.

I didn't reference any scripture so I don't know what you mean. Maybe you should reread my post again.

LordReed:


I didn't reference any scripture so I don't know what you mean. Maybe you should reread my post again.

This is the person you responded to first. Observe he was speaking and referencing the Bible.

pakirisuitesphc::

Dear brothers and sisters,[a] if I should come to you speaking in an unknown language,[b] how would that help you? But if I bring you a revelation or some special knowledge or prophecy or teaching, that will be helpful.
Most pentecostal Christians can open their mouths and speak in tongues but you hardly see those who can interprete among them. Please I want Christians in the house to contribute and no derogatory contribution please.
If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages.

This was your response.

LordReed:
That is because speaking in tongues or glossolalia is not a spiritual gift, it's just something we humans can do, like a baby trying to talk and forming syllables from what it has heard around it. There is nothing to interpret.

You were answering a scriptural text. You perfectly described and gave an intent of how what was written is either not correct or being misinterpreted by the OP.

This is why I responded to let you know that what you wrote is wrong with respect to the scriptures.

hupernikao:



This is the person you responded to first. Observe he was speaking and referencing the Bible.




This was your response.




You were answering a scriptural text. You perfectly described and gave an intent of how what was written is either not correct or being misinterpreted by the OP.

This is why I responded to let you know that what you wrote is wrong with respect to the scriptures.

I didn't reference any scripture nor was my answer based on scripture so I don't know what you mean. The question was: "If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages." and I answered it. I don't care about any scripture, lets show what is factual.

LordReed:


I didn't reference any scripture nor was my answer based on scripture so I don't know what you mean. The question was: "If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages." and I answered it. I don't care about any scripture, lets show what is factual.

his reference is the scriptures, he was also speaking about those who hold the belief in the scriptures. His assumptions were from the scriptures. Hence that is the platform of discussion, and I am sure you know that.

Yes, for this topic only scriptures can be seen as a standard reference.

hupernikao:


his reference is the scriptures, he was also speaking about those who hold the belief in the scriptures. His assumptions were from the scriptures. Hence that is the platform of discussion, and I am sure you know that.

hupernikao:


his reference is the scriptures, he was also speaking about those who hold the belief in the scriptures. His assumptions were from the scriptures. Hence that is the platform of discussion, and I am sure you know that.

My platform is what can be demonstrated. You don't what to demonstrate so what are you on about now? If you don't want to demonstrate then our conversation is over there is nothing to discuss again.

LordReed:


My platform is what can be demonstrated. You don't what to demonstrate so what are you on about now? If you don't want to demonstrate then our conversation is over there is nothing to discuss again.

Okay.

pakirisuitesphc:
Dear brothers and sisters,[a] if I should come to you speaking in an unknown language,[b] how would that help you? But if I bring you a revelation or some special knowledge or prophecy or teaching, that will be helpful.
Most pentecostal Christians can open their mouths and speak in tongues but you hardly see those who can interprete among them. Please I want Christians in the house to contribute and no derogatory contribution please.
If nobody can interpret, how are they sure they are speaking to God or passing meaningful messages.

Dtruthspeaker:
O oh! Ask them o.

Very good observation!

All of them doing yabadabadido up and down and yet not one is interpreting.

Deceiving evil things. Little and big demons are they.

LordReed:
That is because speaking in tongues or glossolalia is not a spiritual gift, it's just something we humans can do, like a baby trying to talk and forming syllables from what it has heard around it. There is nothing to interpret.

Glossolalia actually properly put is speaking in unknown tongues. It becomes a spiritual gift because of the 'unknown' keyword there, which means, if as an Ibo speaking person, out of the blues, I start speaking with a Hausa speaking tongue that previously I am not known before to be able to do, then it translate to be a spiritual gift, although given for the edification of the church, it's primary purpose according to scripture, is not for the sake of the believers, but rather is for the sake of unbelievers

LordReed:
My platform is what can be demonstrated. You don't what to demonstrate so what are you on about now? If you don't want to demonstrate then our conversation is over there is nothing to discuss again.

1 Corinthians 14:22
'Therefore, [unknown] tongues are [meant] for a [supernatural] sign, not to believers but to unbelievers [who might be receptive];
while prophecy [foretelling the future, speaking a new message from God to the people] is not for unbelievers but for believers.'


I totally see where you're coming from and the point you were trying to make, with the gauntlet you threw down, that no one wants to take up and maybe talk about if 1 Corinthians 14:22- 'Therefore, [unknown] tongues are [meant] for a [supernatural] sign, not to believers but to unbelievers [who might be receptive]', is that bible quite believable, why then, to the earshot of unbelievers, who might be receptive, don't we, hear or see christians interpret tongues, as much as they willy nilly speak it?

BassReeves:




Glossolalia actually properly put is speaking in unknown tongues. It becomes a spiritual gift because of the 'unknown' keyword there, which means, if as an Ibo speaking person, out of the blues, I start speaking with a Hausa speaking tongue that previously I am not known before to be able to do, then it translate to be a spiritual gift, although given for the edification of the church, it's primary purpose according to scripture, is not for the sake of the believers, but rather is for the sake of unbelievers

1 Corinthians 14:22
'Therefore, [unknown] tongues are [meant] for a [supernatural] sign, not to believers but to unbelievers [who might be receptive];
while prophecy [foretelling the future, speaking a new message from God to the people] is not for unbelievers but for believers.'


I totally see where you're coming from and the point you were trying to make, with the gauntlet you threw down, that no one wants to take up and maybe talk about if 1 Corinthians 14:22- 'Therefore, [unknown] tongues are [meant] for a [supernatural] sign, not to believers but to unbelievers [who might be receptive]', is that bible quite believable, why then, to the earshot of unbelievers, who might be receptive, don't we, hear or see christians interpret tongues, as much as they willy nilly speak it?

Can you speak in tongues in the manner you describe?

LordReed:
Can you speak in tongues in the manner you describe?

Acts 2:4
'And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.'

Acts 10:44-46
'44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.'

Acts 19:6
'And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.'

If I am honest, I'll say, I don't follow what your question is. How do mean 'can you speak in tongues in the manner you describe'?

There are only three recorded times, as you put it, of 'speak in tongues in the manner you describe' and the three biblical recorded times are found in Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-46 and Acts 19:6, reproduced above to see how people miraculously spoke in other actual languages, that they couldn't speak before and cant stress it enough that, this happened for the sake of unbelievers

Speak in other tongues, in the three above verses, means, speaking in another tongue, one never learned to speak. The three times, this happened in the bible, was on each occassion, done to shift the hearer's unbelief to the Good News. Its important to note that the act exclusively was for the benefit of the unbeliever and not for the sake of any believer.

.

BassReeves:
Acts 2:4
'And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.'

Acts 10:44-46
'44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.'

Acts 19:6
'And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.'

If I am honest, I'll say, I don't follow what your question is. How do mean 'can you speak in tongues in the manner you describe'?

There are only three recorded times, as you put it, of 'speak in tongues in the manner you describe' and the three biblical recorded times are found in Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-46 and Acts 19:6, reproduced above to see how people miraculously spoke in other actual languages, that they couldn't speak before and cant stress it enough that, this happened for the sake of unbelievers

Speak in other tongues, in the three above verses, means, speaking in another tongue, one never learned to speak. The three times, this happened in the bible, was on each occassion, done to shift the hearer's unbelief to the Good News. Its important to note that the act exclusively was for the benefit of the unbeliever and not for the sake of any believer.

Can you speak in another language you never learned to speak as you describe written in the Bible?

LordReed:
Can you speak in another language you never learned to speak as you describe written in the Bible?

If the time or set of circumstances that makes it possible to do so are present, as described written in the Bible, of course I can speak in another language that I've never learned to speak as described written in the Bible.

Beloved, it is very important to recognise the biblical reason and appreciate the justification for an action or event (i.e. speak in another language you never learned to speak as described written in the Bible)

BassReeves:
If the time or set of circumstances that makes it possible to do so are present, as described written in the Bible, of course I can speak in another language that I've never learned to speak as described written in the Bible.

Beloved, it is very important to recognise the biblical reason and appreciate the justification for an action or event (i.e. speak in another language you never learned to speak as described written in the Bible)

I am an unbeliever, what other condition is required since you said its supposed to be a sign to unbelievers.