This document examines the following question: Can an interpretation of a tongue be prophetic? Should it be? Other issues addressed along the way include:
Questions that are not addressed here include:
1. Why should
I pray in the spirit (pray in tongues, 1
Cor
2. What does the bible teach is the initial
evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?
3.
Can all believers speak in tongues?
4.
Is it God’s will for all believers to speak in
tongues?
5. Is it God’s will for all believers to pray in tongues silently to themselves and God?
I have never heard of an interpretation of a public tongue that portends to be anything other than prophecy: God --> Man. I was not aware that a public interpretation could/should be anything but prophetic.
However, this verse could easily be read that way:
1 Corinthians 14:2
For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
So 2 questions arise:
The purpose of this document is to answer both of these questions in light of other scriptures on the topic (such as Acts 2). Is 1 Corinthians 14:2 a blanket statement of doctrine and practice that trumps other scriptures dealing with the same matter? If it is, then the answer to both questions above is “YES”. I will argue below that the answer to both of these questions is “NO”. In order to make this argument, I will have to put the scripture back in its context.
Before looking at other scriptures, it is important to notice that this verse contains a seeming contradiction. I only know of one way to resolve it. It takes a while to explain but should answer questions about how/when tongues should be interpreted.
1 Corinthians 14:2
For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
Footnotes
14:2
Or another language; also in verses 4, 13, 14, 19, 26 and 27
14:2
Or by the Spirit
Regarding question #2, if no one understands him, then it is impossible to interpret. Has Paul placed an impossible expectation on the Corinthians by commanding them to interpret public tongues a few sentences later in verse 13? Does the Bible contradict itself? What is Paul writing about?
1 Corinthians 14:2 describes the case (or state of affairs) when people just blab-out their prayer-language indiscriminately. If you have ever been around people who are doing this practice, then you would verify that Paul’s words are true: you cannot understand them. Don’t feel ashamed of this. I have interpreted PUBLIC tongues before, and I cannot understand people who broadcast their prayer language indiscriminately—I can never understand what they are saying.
Now if God inspires them to speak out in PUBLIC tongues (so that everyone at the meeting can hear them speak in tongues), then He will give them, me, or someone else an interpretation. But this is the correct case that Paul exhorts them to practice later in the passage. He is not dealing with that directly in 1 Corinthians 14:2. No, he is clearly not explaining to correct their method in this verse. If he was, then he would contradict himself as a Bible author, and we have serious problems.
Is Paul making a statement of doctrine as it SHOULD be practiced? Or is he making a statement about the sad fact of what the Corinthians were currently practicing?
The rest of this passage makes it clear that “indiscriminately broadcasting tongues” is exactly the practice that Paul was correcting. He does this by drawing a distinction between public and private tongues... and explaining their appropriate and orderly use, respectively.
1 Corinthians 14
Gifts of Prophecy and Tongues
1Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts,
especially the gift of prophecy. 2For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God.
Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. 3But
everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement
and comfort. 4He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who
prophesies edifies the church. 5I would like every one of you to
speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is
greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so
that the church may be edified.
6Now, brothers, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good
will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy
or word of instruction? 7Even in the case of lifeless things that
make sounds, such as the flute or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being
played unless there is a distinction in the notes? 8Again, if the
trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9So
it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will
anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. 10Undoubtedly
there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without
meaning. 11If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is
saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and he is a foreigner to me. 12So
it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in
gifts that build up the church.
13For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray
that he may interpret what he says. 14For if I pray in a
tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15So what shall
I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will
sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. 16If you are
praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do
not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not
know what you are saying? 17You may be giving thanks well enough,
but the other man is not edified.
I put the
“contradiction” in bold and italicized the “impossible command”. This is no contradiction at all when you
realize what practice he is correcting:
people praying out loud to God, in tongues, in church! Wouldn’t Jesus view this practice ostentatious
and hypocritical?
Matthew 6:5-6
And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street
corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their
reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray
to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in
secret, will reward you.
Paul viewed it as
disorderly, and told them to sit down and shut up, unless they had an
interpretation that would edify their brothers.
He explained that this edification is the purpose of meeting together
publicly. You can pray in tongues
silently by yourself at any time. Why do
it out loud in church?
1 Cor
14:14-17
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.
You can “pray in a tongue” or be “praising God with your spirit”, or sing in a tongue. That’s fine. But do it on your own time.
1 Cor 14:13-19
For this reason anyone who speaks
in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays,
but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but
I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing
with my mind. If you are praising God
with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not
understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know
what you are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is
not edified.
I thank God that I speak in tongues more
than all of you. But in the church I would rather
speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a
tongue.
You can pray/”praise God with your spirit” at any time. The context of verse 16 tells us that this involves tongues. We who pray in tongues know that we can do it silently—without anyone noticing. Paul commands us to do so quietly in the absence of an interpretation at a church meeting:
28If there is no
interpreter, the speaker should keep
quiet in the church and speak to himself
and God
He did not tell him to stop praying, or to quit speaking in tongues: He only told them to be quiet in the church. If we could not speak in tongues quietly, then how would we obey these commands?
Eph 6:18 (NIV)
And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints. (NIV)
Jude 1:20 (NIV)
But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit.
But if you are in church, don’t be so loud as to create disorder by broadcasting your own private prayer language. It seems that the Corinthians had a habit of doing just that. That tongue is for your own edification, unless God tells you to speak it out—and there should be an interpretation if He does.
Be polite, and pay attention to what others are prophesying so you can weigh and test it. Why else did you meet with others? Listen to them.
Should every Church meeting be a prayer meeting where you speak “ten thousand words in a tongue?” No--especially not if the attendants never agreed to be involved in that type of meeting. This type of meeting favors loud praying in tongues as the status quo. Even if you had an interpretation or a prophecy, you would have to yell over the tongues (or rather, loud prayer languages). So this meeting style MAY favor tongues over prophecy and interpretations. That is why Paul made the distinction that “one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues”: To say that those praying loudly in tongues should yield the floor to a word of instruction from God.
There are biblical examples of meetings in which no interpretation of tongues is mentioned (Acts 10:44-48, Acts 19:1-7). Both cases involved believers’ initial reception of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. Neither of these meetings were regular church meetings. Paul himself was there in one case, and he did not require the new believers to “interpret or be quiet” like he did when correcting the Corinthian’s regular church meetings. These cases may have been orderly and fitting exceptions that Paul was referring to when he wrote:
1 Corinthians
14:39-40
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in
tongues. But everything should be done
in a fitting and orderly way.
At house church meetings that I’ve led, I or others have felt led by the Holy Spirit to lay hands and pray for new believers to speak in tongues. We try to be sensitive to new believers, knowing them personally in a house church setting. Many new believers feel like they are in the slow class compared to other mature Christians. They feel “on the spot” speaking in tongues (especially for the first time) alone. Also, sometimes their prayer language sounds rough at first, which embarrasses them. Therefore, I don’t see a problem if the others pray in tongues out loud with no interpretation along with the initial recipient. I figured that God would not have given the candidates the tongues in these cases above if He was that concerned with the lack of interpretation upon initial reception. I realize that I say this only from personal experience, having led less than 20 new converts in the initial reception of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. However, scripture gives two examples (in Acts, above) where the apostles required no interpretation from the new believers/initial recipients. Therefore, I personally believe that forbidding “tongues without interpretation” in such a case is indeed disobeying Paul’s other command to not forbid tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39)
Even worse than over-emphasizing loud tongue praying among its believers, the Corinthian congregation apparently included “inquirers” (those who do not understand tongues, the “unlearned”) and unbelievers who would think that tongue-talkers are mad for speaking in tongues without an interpretation. Now, if there is a prophetic interpretation, then perhaps when the
“unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!" (1 Corinthians 14:24-25)
This is why Paul prefaces the above sentence with this one:
Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22).
First of all, tongues are no big deal to a believer. You should not just blab tongues to show other believers how spiritual you are. The book of Acts gives us few examples of believers who did not speak in tongues; the only one I can think of is Acts 19:1-7—but Paul immediately addresses the issue with them and then they speak in tongues. A longer-lasting example is the case of Paul making the observation that not all of the Corinthians can speak in tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:30. However, he writes to these very people this sentence:
1 Corinthians 14:5 (NIV)
I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.
Even a believer “who does not understand” can find tongues in the Bible and not be as shocked as an unbeliever. Many unbelievers do not even believe in spiritual things: tongues are a sign to them.
I remember when I was an unbeliever; I would hear my newly saved brother pray in tongues in his bedroom. I knew he could not make that stuff up. I was scared. I would have thought it was a demon, but he was beginning to live so holy. But in a church where I don’t know anyone, I might have thought it was a demon: But not if the interpretation seemed parallel in form to the tongue, and instructed everyone to live holy before God. I knew demons don’t say things like that. In fact, the first time I saw a tongue and interpretation in a church, I knew that God was real, and that I needed to repent.
So tongues itself is a sign for unbelievers, not believers. Prophecy, however, (which I will equate to an interpretation below), edifies believers—especially ones who are not at all impressed with tongues, and would not consider it a sign of anything, unless there was a prophetic interpretation.
Many believers think that prophecy is greater than tongues, and/or that they are mutually exclusive. I understand where they get this idea. However, the theology breaks down here:
1 Corinthians 14:1-5
Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift
of prophecy. For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to
God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for
their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. He who speaks in a tongue
edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every
one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you
prophesy. He who prophesies is greater
than one who speaks in tongues, unless
he interprets, so that the church may be edified.
So interpreting a tongue is not lesser than prophesying. Also, the effect of interpreting a tongue is (or at least should be) edification of the church. The context of this passage is promoting prophecy, which “speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort.”
Based on the context of the passage, I personally believe that an interpretation of a tongue should be prophetic. Since this rule is not explicitly stated by Paul, I only expect other believers to concede to the following: That an interpretation, at least, CAN be prophetic.
1 Corinthians 14:23-29
So if the whole church comes
together and everyone speaks in
tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they
not say that you are out of your mind?
But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while
everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced
by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of
his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming,
"God is really among you!"
What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn,
or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the
strengthening of the church. If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at
the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker
should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God. Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is
said.
When I weigh an
interpretation carefully, I ask this question: “Is the church edified
(strengthened)?”
He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.
So I weigh the interpretation the same way that I would weigh a prophecy and consider it to be equal to a prophecy. In that way, I view it as prophecy. If it is not prophecy (God to Man), then I’m not sure how I would weigh it, if it was not addressed to me. Why should I weigh how someone else praises God?
Every interpretation of a tongue that I have ever done or heard was prophetic. I’ve never seen it be anything else. I have seen it be false prophecy. I can’t imagine what else a public interpretation of a tongue would be if not prophetic. I could try to imagine:
TONGUE TALKER: #$%$$$^)(*)(&*(*&*&^%^$#$#@%^*(*&)&
INTERPRETER: I praise you Lord God. You are awesome!
OTHERS (verse 29): Say Jim, what do you think of the way that interpreter praised God a second ago?
JIM: I think they did a good biblical job of using that gift. I’ll give them a star for praising God well.
What is the point of that scenario? I concede that it might be a step up for most churches in wealthy areas which are completely devoid of practicing the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It might even be a step up (or sideways) for the Corinthians, who were misusing them.
Misusing the Gifts of the Spirit was not the only issue that Paul corrected the Corinthians about. Judging from Paul’s letters, they were pretty bad off, compared to the Thessalonians or the Ephesians. Remember the 12 Ephesians that Paul laid hands on and they spoke in tongues in Acts 19:1-7? Did he correct them on misusing the gifts in his letter to the Ephesians? Is it because they quit pursuing them and practicing them?
1
Corinthians 12:31
But eagerly desire the greater gifts. And now I will show you the most excellent way.
1
Corinthians 14:5
I would like every one of you to speak
in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
1
Corinthians 14:39
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to
prophesy, and do not forbid
speaking in tongues.
We tend to look down on the Corinthians. In light of these scriptures, and the others presented here, which is worse, to bumble in practicing the gifts of the Spirit, or to not practice them at all? Which is worse: to try to obey God and be inappropriate, or not to obey Him at all? Not obeying Him at all is like refusing to obey Him.
If the Corinthians were so bad off, are we worse off? Most of us are not even practicing the gifts. It is sad how dissimilar our church experience is to the miracle-working power of the Church in Acts, or even Corinth:
1
Corinthians 12:28
And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets,
third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of
healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and
those speaking in different kinds of tongues.
How do we get there from here? Prophecy is what Paul is exhorting them to practice more. If he was encouraging this type of odd scenario described above, he would be losing ground and detracting away from his own point of the whole chapter—a point that he begins and ends the chapter by making:
1 Corinthians 14:1, 39-40
Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift
of prophecy.
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
Now, if you interpret your own praise to God, that does not offend me, and I’m not going to forbid it. I just don’t think that that is what Paul is pushing for in this chapter.
Now, as for a private interpretation, that is a different issue. It is an issue that is between you and God. I don’t care if it’s not prophecy. If you interpret your own silent tongue and you are praying to God, or worshipping Him, that’s fine with me. Paul talked about how to “pray in a tongue.”
1 Cor
For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
You can pray (1) in a tongue, (2) with your spirit, and (3) with your mind at the same time. Anyone with a prayer language should know that you can pray in tongues quietly enough not to freak people out, or disrupt a church meeting with loud public prayers.
1 Cor
If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.
Paul contrasts the various appropriate uses of the same gift. As far as our private prayer life though, we are commanded thus:
1 Cor 14:13-15
For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
I pray in tongues silently to myself and God. When I do, I try to obey this command. However, I do not always get an interpretation. The ones I have received are usually only prophetic to me. This should be no surprise. If I feel led to share it, I will. I generally don’t do that though. I share public prophecy/tongues/interpretation with the public, and I share individual interpretations with myself. It is very simple.
For example, let’s say I am praying in the Spirit (tongues) silently in a church. Suddenly, I am able to interpret the tongue loosely. The interpretation is something like this: “Speak out loud in tongues”. Then I would obey, (unless I chicken-out) until I felt like the public announcement is over. The times I have done it though, either I or someone else has interpreted. One time I interpreted my own prayer language out loud and spoke directly to the situation of an unbeliever who needed to repent for salvations sake. I did not know who she was, but she responded to the prophecy (interpretation) and thought it was directed at her.
1 Corinthians 14:23-25
So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"
I think it was directed at her too. It was pretty specific and included things that I could not have known. I don’t remember what they were though. That was years ago. Another thing I vaguely remember was that at least 2 other people also spoke a prophecy to this lady. So the secrets of her heart were laid bare. This event also sheds light on the phrase “everybody is prophesying”. The various prophets were speaking God’s words to this sinner so that she was
“judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you”!”
That is what happened.
Biblical example
There is an example of a prophetic interpretation of tongues in Acts 2 which further trumps the aforementioned interpretation of
1 Corinthians 14:2
For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
Let’s pretend that Paul is making a statement of the way it should be. Let’s pretend that he is not merely describing the state of affairs in Corinth. Now read this:
Acts 2
The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost
1When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one
place. 2Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came
from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3They
saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each
of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to
speak in other tongues[1]
as the Spirit enabled them.
5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every
nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came
together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own
language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men
who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears
them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11(both Jews and
converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs--we
hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" 12Amazed
and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"
Back to our 2 questions:
Some would still argue that these tongues were not prophetic. I will try to represent this argument, even though I think it is ridiculous:
Even though the tongues were understood by the visitors, God was not trying to speak to them. Even though they were hearing about his wonderful works in their own tongue—the visitors just happened to hear the disciples praise God. The disciples were “declaring the wonders of God”—to God alone, and NOT to these visitors. The visitors just happened to catch a verbal glimpse into the apostles’ devotional life. It was not prophetic, or God speaking to man.
Why then did God to a miracle to allow the visitors to understand the message? What was the message?
12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"
Peter answers their (and our) question:
14Then Peter stood up
with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the
crowd: "Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain
this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15These men are not
drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning! 16No, this is
what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
17" 'In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all
people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
Well, there you have it. What does this event mean? Peter explains that God is pouring out His spirit and that they were prophesying. The message was clearly prophetic.
What was the message?
We cannot be sure exactly what “wonders of God” the tongue-talkers were declaring to the visitors. Peters tells us that it was prophetic though. What could it be? Let’s look at how Peter continues to explain the situation:
19I will show wonders in
the heaven above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
20The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and
glorious day of the Lord.
21And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be
saved.'[3]
22"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man
accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among
you through him, as you yourselves know. 23This man was handed over
to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked
men,[4]
put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24But God raised him
from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible
for death to keep its hold on him. 25David said about him:
" 'I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
26Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue
rejoices;
my body also will live in hope,
27because you will not abandon me to the grave,
nor will you let your Holy One see
decay.
28You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will fill me with joy in your
presence.'[5]
29"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch
David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to
this day. 30But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him
on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31Seeing
what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ,[6]
that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32God
has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted
to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now
see and hear. 34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he
said,
" 'The Lord said to my Lord:
"Sit at my right hand
35until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet." '[7]
36"Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made
this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
Are these not “the wonders of God”? What wonders of God could be more relevant and timely to warrant such a miracle of interpretation of tongues? Perhaps what he continues to say:
37When the people heard
this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles,
"Brothers, what shall we do?"
38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in
the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive
the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your
children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will
call."
40With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them,
"Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." 41Those
who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to
their number that day.
Peter explains these particular “wonders of God” in response to the visitors question about the meaning of this event. These particular “wonders of God” also happen to be the basis for the Apostles ’ Creed and other early summaries of Christian doctrine. Paul summarizes the gospel in a way similar to Peters above sermon here:
1 Cor 15:1-4
1 Now,
brothers, I want to remind you of the
gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken
your stand.
2 By
this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to
you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For
what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for
our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 that
he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
(NIV)
Peter himself reiterates in his epistle that more than mere mental assent to this gospel is required for salvation:
1 Pet 4:17-19
17 For
it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with
us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
18 And,
"If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the
ungodly and the sinner?"
19 So
then, those who suffer according to God's will should commit themselves to
their faithful Creator and continue to do good.
(NIV)
So, we cannot be sure whether the visitors heard the Gospel that Peter declared in their own language that day. I personally believe that Peter’s explanation makes that implication. However, we can be sure about this: those “wonders of God” were a prophetic interpretation of tongues, and were intended for the visitors to hear.
You should desire the greater gift of prophecy (which can be an interpretation), but do not forbid speaking in tongues. The Corinthians apparently had a lot to say, according to verse 26.
1 Corinthians 14:26-33
26What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of
instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be
done for the strengthening of the church. 27If anyone speaks in a
tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If
there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak
to himself and God.
29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh
carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who
is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all
prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The
spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For
God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
In fact, they had so much to say that Paul had to be the “shut up police”: Telling the loud tongue-praying people to keep quiet, unless there is an interpretation—which is equal to prophecy. This is because the purpose of this chapter is to promote orderly prophecy that builds up the church.
I am accustomed to a few sentences or phrases spoken in tongues to the congregation, followed by an interpretation of similar length.
One of the funniest stories I heard in
SPEAKER: ki
TRANSLATOR: You
SPEAKER: taki
TRANSLATOR: should
SPEAKER: kinday
TRANSLATOR: repent!
I thought it was funny because it would be hard to follow like that. On the other hand, one time I heard the speaker go on and on in tongues for so long, it may have been 7-10 breaths. Then no one interpreted.
Paul Hudson, an
author in
Let us consider Paul’s instructions
concerning tongues:
I Corinthians 14:27-28
27 If any man speak in an unknown
tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let
one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter,
let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
Bill Thurman, a retired professor of
Classics, a scholar of Latin and Greek, serves as an elder and teaches in a
Messianic meeting in Asheville, North Carolina in the United States of
America. He is a proponent of following
New Testament instructions for meetings.
The following is a quote from an email he sent to participants on his
email discussion list.
“Contrary to almost all English translations
I think 'two or three' does not refer to those who speak in tongues or to
prophets, but to statements (logoi).”
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Thurman goes on to define a statement as one breath worth of verbiage. As soon as you stop for air, you are beginning the next statement. I can identify with this view as an interpreter. It would be difficult for me to interpret more than 3 breaths of tongues. I would prefer 2, but who am I?
Read 1 Corinthians 14 through with the idea that an interpretation of a tongue CAN be prophetic. See if there are any contradictions in scripture. Does it make more sense? If it does not, then please explain each of the scriptural inconsistencies presented above about the following statement of doctrine: Interpretations of tongues are never prophetic, they are always only manà God.
The understanding of 1 Corinthians 14 that I have presented also sheds light on whether or not to forbid speaking in tongues in the absence of an interpretation upon initial reception of the gift of tongues.