I had to think about this a bit. I generally agree with Chris on this though I also believe in leaving room for what I don't understand (not that Chris doesn't).
Anyways, I sat down to read the scripture in question, after doing so I found myself asking "What about this is obscure?" After reading all of chapter 1 Cor 14 specifically, I think the obscurity and confusion comes from people's personalities that we read into it.
v1. Love is your guide to use of the gifts. Desire gifts but prophesying more than the others.
v2-4. Speaking in a tongue that is unknown (whether it's some angelic tongue if such exists doesn't matter because it's unknown) reveals mysteries so its good, but since love is our guiding light prophesy is better because it builds up, encourages, and gives comfort.
We know of Acts where God gave people tongues so that everyone understood what was being preached, however. Whatever this issue is, Paul is saying there IS a gift of tongues and it IS one in which it is possible to speak WITHOUT the hearer's understanding. Whatever the purpose or use, there IS a gift that can be spoken from God's inspiration that we may be unable to understand.
v5. Prophesy is better than tongues UNLESS there is interpretation.
v6-8. What profit is it to speak in tongues with revelation/inspiration, doctrine or preaching. In other words it does no good to make noise, there must be a message to deliver. And logically then what good does a message do if no one understands it? Like the musical instrument if you can't make out the tune/the notes than you can't sing along. If you're revealing a warning to people but no one understands than it's the same as the battle trump that no one understands is calling them to battle!
v9-11 Likewise (as in comparison) how shall anyone know what you speak unless you use WORDS that are easy to understand. So we know though it may be an unknown tongue, it has WORDS not gibbersh, not nonsensical sounds. This is an actual language of which IN THE WORLD there are many (there may be a tongue of angels, I don't see why they wouldn't have a tongue), but he says none of them is without signification. In other words, all languages have words and sounds and the sounds and words have meanings. So when we hear someone say one thing over and over in a 'tongue' and then translate it as meaning many different and mutually exclusive things, odds are it's not your hearing, they are just speaking gibberish. So if somneone speaks to people who don't know the meaning of the tongue (implying the meaning can be known) then they'll just be a foreigner. Don't bother with this guy he doesn't speak English. Which again goes back to it doesn't edify, it's not love. Why are you running your mouth to me if you know I can't understand you? The only reason I can think of is for show.
v12-14. As much as you want spiritual gifts, seek to be better at it for the building up of the assembly. Don't do it for you, do it for them.
Notice, pray for interpretation. So he's saying it IS possible to pray in a tongue in your spirit that you YOURSELF do not understand. So it's good only for your spirit, but your UNDERSTANDING is unfruitful. This is good for your spirit, it does not increase your soul's understanding. The body and the soul, and the spirit all need excercise this is a way the excercises the spirit that The Spirit gives, but unless you seek for understand and the Spirit gives it to you, then it doesn't do your Soul much good. Notice we cannot give ourselves any of the gifts, and it's possible to get one without another, or even none of these particular three. But we can all study and teach and that edifies both ourselves and others.
v15-17. Seek to pray and understand with the spirit, to sing and understand with the spirit. One is possible without the other.
Now "how else shall he THAT OCCUPIETH THE ROOM OF THE UNLEARNED say amen at THY GIVING OF THANKS seeing he understandeth not." You cannot agree with someone you cannot understand, and in fact maybe you should be disagreeing with this one who you cannot understand. Notice the problem is in the room of the unlearned. Unlearned of what? The tongue that he doesn't understand. We cannot give ourselves either the GIFT of tongues or of interpretation, but we can LEARN a tongue. So what? This is again a real tongue, you could record it take it to the right dictionary and it would mean something. Again, maybe that would be an angel's tongue in which case I need webster's exhaustive angelic dictionary, but either way it is a real language that could really be learned. And since we know that that it is good to have agreement, there is no agreement to be had unless there is more than yourself present to understand and agree. In fact if even you cannot understand (soul) your words than even your soul cannot agree with your spirit in prayer.
Again love is the guide. In the ROOM OF THE UNLEARNED you do well to give thanks in tongues, but you aren't edifying anyone but yourself. Love is not selfish.
v18-20. 5 words of understanding are better than 10,000 words in tongues without understanding. That means you need to say at least 2,000 WORDS in tongues to equal the english word "Hallelujah."
v21-22 Tongues are prophesied as being a sign from God in the torah. But notice the sign is in the Word of God. The sign is in the Word of God coming back to them in another tongue. Every time I speak to a Jew in English about the Messiah I am making this prophecy true. But Israel must KNOW that it is God's word. Me speaking gibberish that CaNNOT be understood to anyone cannot be KNOWN to be the Word of God. Therefore this prophecy can ONLY be fulfilled in the languages of men.
And who is it a sign to? "This people" who apparently Isaiah 28 says that he will speak to a scornful people, apparently unbelievers says Paul. Tongues is a sign to unbelievers, not believers. It's a sign to unbelievers because the Word of God is coming to them from someone else's language that they know or it's coming in their language from someone who does not know their language. But to those who already believe, but do not understand the language it is not a sign or edification at all. The learned unbeliever can be built up because they understand and thus believe because of the sign, to unlearned believer it can't raise them because they can't understand it.
v23-25 "If there be the WHOLE ASSEMBLY come TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE...and there come in those that are UNLEARNED OR UNBELIEVERS, will they not say you are mad?" If everyone speaks with tongues while you're TOGETHER then an unlearned person will say you're mad...why? Because they can't understand the language. And if you aren't speaking a language at all, then they are right you ARE MAD. If this believer was learned they would have no reason to say you're mad because they would say "oh the gospel is preached in bulgarian too, how wonderful!" If the unbeliever comes it will still be a sign to him so he might repent, but if we walks in even if he's learned and he sees everyone just running their mouths disorderly ("Everyone speaking in tongues") he'll again say you're mad even if he understands a few of the languages. Even a mad man may speak in english.
But if it's prophesy, they can understand all of them so they are convicted by all of them because it makes his heart apparent and repent. Understanding is necessary for conviction. I can't feel conviction of what I do not understand.
V26-30 "Why is it then", then what? Then seeing that you'll be seen as mad WHEN YOU'RE ALL TOGETHER and speaking things without interpretation...in other words seeing that disorder of the things of the spirit causes the appearance of madness, why do you all have a psalm, doctrine, tongue, reevelation, doctrine...this isn't spirit or tongue problem at all, it's an order problem.
No where does Paul have a problem with the origin of a true tongue (as opposed to frenzied gibberish) being from God whether it is understood or not, whether it is in order or not. His problem is with there being order and not confusion and apparent madness. So what does he say "Let all things be DONE unto edifying." In other words "follow after love."
Then he lays out let everything to be done in courses, in order. A few people, one at a time should prophesy, give revelation, doctrine, interpretation. All things not just tongues need to be done with order.
And of tongues if there is no interpreter "in the assembly" let him keep silent. He even says that if one prophesies and another sitting by has a revelation, let the FIRST GUY stop talking and let the second speak. It's not that there's anything wrong with either, the problem is the confusion and disorder. One speaks the others keep silent and disern.
v31-33 Everyone can have a turn, but one by one. Well how can that be "if the Spirit comes upon me I have to speak, I can't be silent!" On the contrary "the spirits of the prophets ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROPHETS." Why? Because God is NOT the author of confusion.
v34-35 I'm not exactly sure what this means, whether women should speak in the assembly or not, because he does say let YOUR women keep silence, maybe that could be a discussion for later? I can't find the part of the Law that he is referring to. It could be that women can also be rendered wives. If it speaks of all women than how could an unmarried older woman learn seeing as she couldn't ask in assembly and has no husband to ask? On the other hand wives being silent would make more sense being not given license/permitted "being under obediance" to whom? Husbands which then clarifies the point "if THEY will learn...let them ask their husbands at home." Again that would be something of order, but it would seem then logically that a man in assembly could give his wife permission to speak something God has put on her heart...I think it would be good to discuss.
But anyways given the topic, it does seem pointed that Paul would choose to address women in particular because it does seem in my experience women are more prone to do things "out of order" in regards to their spirits. I don't mean to be sexist, but it seems that men are more built towards order than women are. Or it might not have to do with build at all but purpose and authority. A wife may be more orderly than a man, but it isn't God's purpose for her to excercise that with authority.
v36-38. Are you the only one with insight? Acknowledge the apostles, or the other authorities...especially Paul =) Or if he wants to be stupid, let him be stupid. Doesn't Paul have a great way of dealing with clonepeople? Just let them be. Don't get worked up.
v39-40. Covet the gift of being able to speak God's words (but boy you'd better know you're hearing for God). But don't forbid people to speak in tongues you don't know.
And let all things be DONE decently (literally decoriously as in decorating. Walk with a look of none madness, nobility rank, seemly), and in ORDER/arrangment/dignity.
I think that all flows pretty sensibly, and I'd say taken as a whole it is to big and clear and obvious to be called obscure.
I got a couple of very distinct things out of it.
1. There is a gift of tongues that are not known (as well as other gifts).
2. The understanding (soul) of that tongue may not even be known to the speaker but it is their spirit's expression to God, and it is the expression of mysteries. It is legitimate even if done out of order and without understanding.
3. It is possible to be understood. It is not gibberish, it is not personal, it is an actual language that a person of learning could understand.
4. It is a sign to the unbeliever.
5. Prophesy is better UNLESS there is an interpretation.
6. In the ASSEMBLY or with others who are not learned of that tongue or given interpretation, it is of no profit and works towards no agreement. So without interpretation, it should not be spoken.
7. All gifts, SHOULD be excercised, but they should be in order/dignity/decorous, without the appearance of madness.
Having said that, Alisa brought up an interesting point. The scriptures above seem to make a distinction between in assembly and in private. The question seems to be in speaking towards the congregation, if then a person is going to a prayer meeting with others that they know...if the purpose is to pray to God and not necessarily to hear the prayers of others and the people are of this common understanding, then would it still be out of order for one to pray aloud in tongues? I told her, if I was there I would find it distracting even though they're not talking to me because I can't agree with what I can't understand, but maybe that's just me. I don't see it as impossible that others who (assuming they actually have the gift) would be able pray in tongues without distracting others who for some reason did not find it distracting. I'm not that person, but in that sense I would say it would not be out of order in that setting. Though I would still wonder why someone would speak aloud what no one present can agree to unless it was for show.
But in the end, even if done out of order Paul seems to say that it IS DONE. There are people legitimately speaking words that the audience cannot hear and that even they cannot hear, and are out of order, but they are still the words as a result of the gift of tongues.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with about your views on this subject. And you are right about there does seem to be scriptural evidence stating that you can speak in a language that no one understands and that it is a genuine spiritual experience. What becomes my hang-up though is where the rubber meets the road. For example in your scenario, why would a person speak in front of others when there is no one who understands what she is saying? How do I as a believer who does not have this know when I am being lied to or not. If God tells us to test all things and I can't understand what is being said then that leaves me impotent other than the convictions of my spirit which can be vague at best. So what do I do? Someone is speaking some weird language that no one understands. What if the person is cursing me? or as I have seen in the past, Someone can say something which sounds an awful lot like gibberish to me, and then some other guy will pipe in and give some interpretation. How do I know that is true? Better yet what good is it to me or anyone else? I guess that is my problem as a whole with the gift, I don't mean to draw the line where God is has not drawn it, but as a whole I have a very hard time knowing in that case when someone is telling the truth or not. So at best when it is done in my presence (both learned and a believer) it is just an irritant or a distraction. So in a nut shell I guess I am just wondering what tools God has given us to prevent us from being had.
ReplyDeleteI hear you. I've voiced the same things, how can someone not be distracted by what they can't agree with either. I don't know how, but there people who claim they aren't distracted. What can I say? "You don't know what you're talking about you are distracted and irritated?"
ReplyDeleteI think that those that aren't irritated are just able to tune it out on a conscious level so that it just becomes background like music, and those that are just can't tune it into the background. But either way this proves Paul's point that without understanding it is unprofitable/unedifying.
But what can be done about it? I was talking the other day about prophesy. The general subject was testing spirits. I relayed a true story where a 'prophetic letter' had come to the congregation I am in now. It wasn't addressed to us, but some people read it from this group some believe to be prophets. The prophecy at hand was that it would be a year of premature deaths. One of the members of the congregation stood up and spoke against it, saying it wasn't going to happen. I can't say that that person claimed to have a 'word from the Lord' I can't recall. But in I'd say a month or two, three people had died in the families of the congregation.
So we were talking about it, and I was being asked what then were we supposed to do with this prophecy when we heard it? And I said in scripture only one prophecy ever didn't come to pass, that was Jonah's with the future actually being changed because of repentance. So at first I said repentance is the only response. But then occurred to me, Jonah shows that the future can be changed. Maybe that's why prophecies are often subject to interpretation, if God knows by name and date who will do what, then what is the point of vagueness? Isn't it that by being vague we often don't foresee the event, we recognize after it has passed? But God is constantly asking "who told you this would happen long ago? Did the idols foretell it? No, I did!" I conclude than that the future, even Revelation could be changed if we were to repent. And we could plan around the future if we could truly understand the prophecies. But God conceals them until they come to pass usually, so that we can't change them and when they happen God is given the glory...after all if he revealed the future with enough detail that we could change it, how could we ever trust his prophecy if it never came to pass?
So I wonder if maybe we don't misunderstand all the gifts. If Prophecy isn't for planning the future, but for giving God the glory about the past...maybe tongues isn't so we can understand the mysteries of what they speak now (without interpretation), maybe they're for some other purpose that is to the glory of God the means of which isn't revealed.
Say a tongue had interpretation and the interpretation is true (if the tongue weren't true than the true interpretation would be...this man has lost his mind). So assuming both are true, he tells you something. What can you do with that? If he told you that God says my name is no longer the LORD it's now Harry Bobo, you would reject it. Why because you would still test it. My point is that there is no 'being had.' When a prophet said follow other gods and his sign DID come to pass, he was to be rejected on account of the message. If a presumptuous prophet spoke and his sign did not come to pass, he was to be rejected on account of the sign.
You cannot be had if you are testing the words regardless of their source. So what good does it do? It can't reveal anything that you couldn't already find in scripture. All it can do is give you a new perspective or light by which to examine what was already available to you. And when you realize that what was spoken was true (having been tested) then you can give glory to God.
Which perhaps that's why God calls it a sign. A sign doesn't tell you where to go. It tells you where you are, and at the sign you decide which way to go.
If you receieve a word in tongues with interpretation, there's nothing you can do. The sign is faded, the music is noise, and the word is garbled.
If you receieve a word in tongues or prophesy and there is interpretation, you can only do what you were already supposed to be doing. Repent of your sins and check the map to see where you are. The map says that this sign is where it's supposed to be, but you just realized that you've been looking at the map upside down. It's still true, but you the sign has arrows facing opposite of what you expected so you get the insight to look at the map another way.
So what if they are cursing you? Does not Hebrews say that the greater blesses the lesser? So then logically doesn't cursing also flow this way? If that is so, who would have spiritual authority to curse you? Only someone higher in the kingdom that you are a part of. Syrian senators can't place authority over Israeli senators. So if this person is higher in the kindgom, then they must be cursing you on God's behalf, has God ever cursed someone without telling them how to avoid it? Without warning? I don't see anywhere in scripture where God failed to give such a warning. How could a person excercising the gift of the spirit curse someone whom God has not cursed? And if they aren't of God, than who cares who they are? I can't think of one curse in scripture issued by an enemy of God that had any authority.
If it can be tested, test it. If it can't be tested, nothing you can gain or lose because of it. It's then all about them. Again why would anyone say something that no one not even themselves could understand in the presence of others? I would say maybe they're just talking aloud, I know sometimes I do that without thinking when I'm alone...I'm too conscious when I'm not. If not then they intend to be heard and knowing it's not for your benefit then the only one that remains is for show. But that's between them and God, we can't know it.
Here's one to blow our minds. What if we all have the gift of interpretation and it really is gibberish?
hahahahahahaha
ReplyDeleteI see your point. They are not hurting anyone, at worst they are just a distraction, and the bible teaches that it shouldn't be because he is a God of order.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting conversation. Chris you've asked some good questions, and Jesse you've adequately answered. Very interesting indeed. However, or but, (you had to see that coming), you have any many ways opened up a can of worms. Although I believe your conclusion regarding approach to the subject is accurate, it left me "wanting."
ReplyDeleteConsumed by three projects of my own, I hardly have the time to explain, but I will do so in part.
Interestingly enough, you both recognized that the "gifts" are interlinked. In other words, a "gift" can not work independently of the others. This demands the need for others to be involved. You are not a lone crusader. This is the picture we often paint because the "prophets" appeared to be isoldated in the faith. They were not isolated, but limited. A big difference.
My point of contention is actually expressed by the responses you give. Every gift requires understanding. The understanding that you have will provide interpretation. Thus, it can, at times it may appear to be foolishness, and other "pearls of wisdom." Where you are located on the spectrum of understanding will determine the result.
A good example of this can be seen in the study of "prophecy." Jesse, you are aware of one of my current ventures regarding the topic. The "scholars" suggest that prophecy can be and have "dual interpretation." This is a limited position. There is nothing, but our understanding that assigns a number of times a prophecy may be fulfilled, (Key) at least in part. What do I mean?
History has a way of repeating itself. This statement is widely held, and proven throughout the course of man and Scripture. There is a difference between fulfillment of a prophecy, and the truth. However, fulfilled prohpecy will always be true. All of the truth is not required in order to fulfill it in part, but only the part must be true. Truth will be repeated until complete. Understanding this statement will help, hopefully, explain the repetition of "religious" service. Your still not sure what I'm saying, are you?
What may be gibberish to one, is not necessarily to the other. You are not at the center of the universe. Every time God acts or moves He does not say, "Jack, this is intended for you." Does this mean that I don't need to seek understanding? This is a sin of great proportion.
One final note and I'll conclude. Think of understanding in "layers" or "steps," symbolic of the steps to approach the altar of the Temple. Each step is placed atop the other. You have no idea what is on the top step, while at the bottom. You may think you do, but when was the last time you were up there? All of the gifts are a process of growth.
I would go into more detail, but time will not allow me to prevail. I do agree with the conclusion, but I am not sure the practical steps of obtaining leave me any the wiser.
God Bless
Jack
I understand the premise of what your say...or am in the process of understanding.
ReplyDeletePro 1:2 To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;
3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;
4 To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.
5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
I have come to believe, that we do not understand almost anything from being told it, but by understanding it. It is the process of seeking and sifting...it is the activity of listening and understanding that gives us understanding. We don't become scholars by diploma, we become scholars by studying.
Anyways, I did not follow your whole part on truth and prophecy. Perhaps you could put it another way? As for the practical steps, I find this issue of 14 was the profitability to the assembly of the use of the gifts. Which leaves us essentially where we first were with Paul, If I speak with tongues but have not love...if my speaking in tongues doesn't edify those that I purpose to speak in front of, then how is it love? If it is not love than what does it profit anyone even the speaker?
In the end it seems that we are at the same place, but are we not wiser? We may not have determined from a practical standpoint what to do with what others do that we don't understand...but for ourselves we've learned that our lack of understanding doesn't change the origin of the words. And for ourselves we learn to not be caught up in a pursuit of the gifts for their own sake but for how they edify ourselves and others, thus even in private "pray for understanding," because even our own tongues would be useless to our souls without it.