The Benny Hinn thread was getting clogged by some of my tangents — and I thought this one worth exploring in more detail, away from some of the heat in that thread. It’s been a bit of a sleeper “hobby horse” of mine for a while, and the Benny Hinn thread brought it to the surface. Please tell me what you think on the ideas below — I’m trying to get to the guts of these passages, and will help with the Greek.

I seriously wonder about the gift of tongues. Is the Corinthian gift the same as the miraculous reversal of the “curse of Babel” we witness at Pentecost? I don’t think so. For one, at Pentecost everyone understood the apostles, no matter where they were from. And I can tell you from personal experience, I can’t understand a thing they’re saying out at Hillsong! ;-)

That alone should tell us about Corinthian tongues. Personally, I think the Corinthian tongues is merely speaking about how to deal with a multicultural multi-lingual church — ordinary human languages in a very multicultural city. Yep, ordinary human languages.

But how can that be? Our experience of modern “tongues” tells us the person speaking in tongues does not even know what they are saying in the way I do when I make these grand statements in English :-).

Our experience says that no one else understands them either! (Unless someone works themselves up to being an “Interpreter” — more on that later.)

How is the mind “unfruitful”?

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[e] 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.

Could it be that “my mind is unfruitful” is not actually supporting the idea of an ecstatic experience that the mind does not engage or rule or understand — but rather is it saying that my mind is unfruitful in the lives of others if I don’t speak in their language? The whole emphasis over these chapters is that tongues should be understood so that the church can be edified. Why is the individual tongue speaker exempt from this? How are they being edified if not through understanding? It seems contrary to the main thrust of the chapter.

Indeed, verse 17 says we “may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.” Giving thanks for what — speaking a language I can’t understand? How does that edify me? Obviously I can’t give thanks for something I don’t already understand.

The emphasis on human foreign languages can be seen earlier…
11 “If 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.”

The introduction to 1 Corinthians Chapter 14 can also be read in this light.

“2For anyone who speaks in a tongue[a] 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.”

Hi Dave.
The stumbling block to the interpretation you advanced must be that a tongues-speaker needs to pray that he can interpret what he is saying.
But a person who is speaking a language he understands has no need to pray that he can interpret it, because of course he can interpret it!

Also, this denigrates the spiritual gift of tongues to mere human ability to speak in more than one language.

Don’t think that by saying this I’m a fan of modern Pentecostalism, because I’m not.

But I don’t find the interpetation you are advancing satisfying, because of the above point.

I understand what you are saying, but I think I’ve already dealt with that.

The fact of praying for correct interpretation can of course be read in the modern Charismatic sense, that the “tongues speaker” has no idea what they are saying.

However, it does not rule out my interpretation. Do we pray for our ministries, and that we will excel at what we do? Do we pray for our teachers who otherwise teach quite well ordinarily? Do we pray for our missionaries, that we have already ensured have the best education and done everything in our “earthly” powers to prepare? Do we pray before our pastor preaches to us?

In other words, prayer can be humbly asking God that He will bless and grow ministries that we are already “quite well trained in, thank you very much!” It is preventing that very attitude of pride, acknowledging our propensity to go it alone. We can pray for the opportunity to use a gift we already have. That has been discounted as well, yet is another possibility for this passage.

Look again at the verse in that light.

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[e] 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.

You stated…

Also, this denigrates the spiritual gift of tongues to mere human ability to speak in more than one language.

Why does a “spiritual gift” have to be an obviously, apparently “miraculous gift”? Please prove that, because I think you will have some difficulty driving a wedge between the “human” and the “spiritual” like this in all cases. Not everything in 1 Cor 12 is “miraculous” in this way, yet they remain “spiritual gifts”.

28And 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. 29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[d]? Do all interpret? 31But eagerly desire[e] the greater gifts.

What is so miraculous abouut having the “gift of administration”? I did book-keeping for Matthias Media for a while there, and other than the fact that we somehow kept the pigeons at bay (in the old offices) I don’t see anything particularly miraculous about it. (Oh, we did get through summer somehow. And Ian Carmichael managed to put up with me one afternoon after I’d had too much coffee and chocolate in the same afternoon, that was pretty miraculous. ;-)

So who is for “helping others” as a miraculous gift? I mean, for me it might be… I’m a grumpy old so and so these days. But other people seem to ENJOY it! Imagine that? God has given them such sweet personalities that they just like looking after their brothers and sisters in Christ. When Harry was sick, we had some very smart, very busy people coming over to sit and play with and babysit Amelia so Joy could work and I could be in hospital with Harry. It felt miraculous to me at the end of a few days in hospital to come home and find the place tidy, and food in the fridge. But I can assure you there were no lightning bolts or glowing bodies doing the work. Just people.

What about teaching? The fact that a grump like me might have volunteered time to do Thursday morning Scripture might have been a bit miraculous, an answer to someone else’s prayer, but hey? I still have a lot of work to do as I prepare the lesson. It doesn’t feel miraculous.

No, I’m not convinced by either of those arguments David McKay — but I understand where they come from and I appreciate your input. I think we need some Greek geeks in here to do a word study on “mind” and “spirit” as I suggested above. If spirit is always referring to some emotive, unthinking part of our being then maybe the traditional interpretation of the passage stands. But if it is a deeply conscious, thinking personal part of us, then maybe I’m right.

I pray that someone will be able to interpret the Greek for me! ;-) (And to some Greek newbies, I’ve heard that ever mastering the language can seem truly miraculous.)

Dave, as one who does not accept modern Pentecostal theology, I would like the interpetation you and Gordon are putting forward to be true: but it doesn’t seem to square with the need to pray that you can interpet what you are saying.

Hi David M,

13For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.

your argument appears to rely on the words “that he may”.

In other words, unless something miraculous happens, there is no way the tongues speaker can interpret what he is saying in another language. “That he may” clearly implies there is no natural ability to do the thing in question — it has to be miraculously enabled each and every time.
Is that the argument? That’s a lot to read into the 3 words “that he may”. Couldn’t it also be understood “that he might” have an opportunity to, or even that he may do it to his or her best and most accurate ability? Or even for boldness as they interpret it?

Let’s look at Paul’s prayer requests.

Ephesians 6:20
20for which I am an ambassador in chains. Pray that I may declare it fearlessly, as I should.

Colossians 4:4
4Pray that I may proclaim it clearly, as I should.

I guess according to the same logic Paul didn’t know the gospel he was proclaiming, and it had to be miraculously enabled each and every time?

Why the shift?

What no-body has explained to me about the Charismatic understanding of tongues is why the Holy Spirit “down-shifted” the gift of tongues to something less helpful?

Let’s be clear what I think was happening in the bigger biblical theology picture with tongues.

First, many diverse languages are a curse from God.

Genesis 11
1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As men moved eastward, [a] they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”
5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. 6 The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel [c] —because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

David M said

Dave, as one who does not accept modern Pentecostal theology, I would like the interpetation you and Gordon are putting forward to be true: but it doesn’t seem to square with the need to pray that you can interpet what you are saying.

Just scanning through and wondering. Two thoughts, hopefully coherent....

1. I’m not sure that the experience of tongues as the unintelligible language, presumably a miraculous gift, need necessarily be correlated with pentecostalism in experience, at least, if not in theology. While some pentecostal churches (of any denomination, even Anglican :)) may openly teach how to speak in tongues, there are experiences of those individuals whose theology may be orthodox and reformed but who find great encouragement from this experience.

2. If the ‘modern Pentecostal’ style of tongues (i.e. the unintelligible language, presumably a miraculous spiritual gift) is not what the Corinthian tongues is referring to, does this necessarily exclude it from Christian practice and experience? If this particular phenomenon is not known or spoken about in the Bible in your opinion, Davids, does that mean it shouldn’t be done?

I guess my concern is that it takes away from the verse that says “God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, and power, and a SOUND MIND.”

God communicates to his people. He is the talking God. We are commanded again and again to safeguard our minds, to respond to his commands and calls to repent, to dwell on the scriptures, to be transformed in the renewing of our minds.

“But if feels good” sounds more to me like a New Ager sitting under a pyramid. It’s inwardly orientated “buzz” focused — what am I getting out of it as my tongue sings away uncoherently? How am I edified by it if my mind is not built up and my heart encouraged by focusing on the very coherent word of God?

I tried it as a teenager. I even convinced myself that it was not me for a while. But in the end, I had to be honest, I was doing it.

I saw a friend lose their faith over tongues. There they were, praying in tongues in a charismatic church. I visited with another closer friend of mine, and saw this High School guy I knew crying. “But it’s just ME doing it, I control it, there’s nothing miraculous about it. People in other faiths do it. It’s a load of...... “

He lost his faith. He walked out of Christianity that night, and never came back. It didn’t feel good to him.

My problem with the experience argument is twofold.
1. I have seen the “dark side” of tongues, and other religions do it.
2. I thought we were seeking first to understand God’s word and then apply it to our lives, not the other way around. God’s word must be our guide. The irony of all those Charismatics accusing evangelicals of pharisaic man made rules and regulations is it is often they that are running with new, man-made manufactured practices and experiences (Tornoto blessing etc), or sitting around in church praying and weeping because God won’t speak to them, and all the while their bibles remain closed.

Dave, I am having trouble following exactly what it is you are proposing, so perhaps I’ve misunderstood you, because trying to read 1Cor 12-14 the way I understand you makes little to no sense of the text. Hopefully you can clarify things a little for me. Let’s start at the beginning of chapter 14. My problems start in verse 2:
[quote author="Paul the Apostle"]For the one speaking in a tongue does not speak to people but to God, for no one understands; he is speaking mysteries by the Spirit.

It sounds to me as though your arguing that the gift of tongues is the ability to speak a foreign human language, and this was particularly relevant in multicultural Corinth. Yet the language Paul is speaking about in 1Cor 14:2 is one no-one understands. If I try and put this together with my understanding of your interpretation, then there must be at most one person in the Corinthian congregation who can speak any particular foreign (i.e. non-Greek) language, for otherwise it would not be true that “no one understands.”

Just to mention one other matter quickly, I think David G. McKay has raised a valid point which you haven’t adequately addressed.
[quote author="Dave Lankshear"]However, it does not rule out my interpretation. Do we pray for our ministries, and that we will excel at what we do? Do we pray for our teachers who otherwise teach quite well ordinarily? Do we pray for our missionaries, that we have already ensured have the best education and done everything in our “earthly” powers to prepare? Do we pray before our pastor preaches to us?

In other words, prayer can be humbly asking God that He will bless and grow ministries that we are already “quite well trained in, thank you very much!” It is preventing that very attitude of pride, acknowledging our propensity to go it alone. We can pray for the opportunity to use a gift we already have. That has been discounted as well, yet is another possibility for this passage.

But what is Paul encouraging the tongue-speaking Corinthians to pray for? Not for their gift, but for another gift (see 1Cor 12:10)! Consequently the situation here differs somewhat from the examples you have highlighted.

Aside from this, why does Paul specifically require that those who speak in a tongue need to pray that they may interpret (1Cor 14:13; cf. 1Cor 14:27-28)?

14:2 may be the most troublesome verse to this theory, but it’s not one I proposed. I’ll have to investigate the source material and see if they had a good response. Otherwise, I think I dealt with the other arguments above. Paul asked people to pray “that he may” declare the gospel. Did he not know it to need help every time he declared it? Was it alien sounding to him? Come on, I’ve dealt with that one.

But I need to look further at 14:2. Unfortunately, kids are home sick (much improved though, at school & preschool tomorrow) and I have to go. Later maybe?

[quote author="Dave Lankshear"]14:2 may be the most troublesome verse to this theory, but it’s not one I proposed. I’ll have to investigate the source material and see if they had a good response. Otherwise, I think I dealt with the other arguments above. Paul asked people to pray “that he may” declare the gospel. Did he not know it to need help every time he declared it? Was it alien sounding to him? Come on, I’ve dealt with that one.

Dave, I’m willing to wait for clarification, but I must say that I find your response difficult to understand, perhaps I need the gift of interpretation here. What is the point you’re trying to make in appealing to Paul asking people to pray for him?

I have only chosen 14:2 because I started going through 1Cor 14 reading with my understanding of what you’re proposing, and that’s the first problem I hit. It is by no means the last one, nor necessarily the most difficult, but I don’t have time to go through every verse in one post, so I figured it to be a good place to begin. If it is possible to get past it with a satisfactory explanation, we can move to the next problem…

Enkers, I wonder if in 1 Cor 14:2 there is an element of hyperbole when Paul says “no-one understands”. The Corinthian church itself seems to be full of people making overblown claims about their own spiritual knowledge and other giftings. In chapter 13 there is some fairly clear hyperbole too, about bodies given to be burned, mountains being moved, etc.

If the situation at Corinth is one of barely controlled chaos (everyone speaking at the same time, some getting drunk at the Lord’s supper, women shouting out questions over the top of the one speaking), then “no-one understands” would be a pretty apt description of what is going on.

If we accept that Corinth was a multicultural city, that the church meeting reflected this multiculturalism, and that the basic vibe was unrestrained ecstatic expression, it is not hard to see how you could get a few people together shouting out their prophecy in their own local dialect, and “no-one understands”. If I happen to be a solo Swedish Viking passing through on my way to do a bit of raping and pillaging, I might just be tempted to launch into a chorus of “Små Groderna” to show that my tongue was just as good as everybody else’s. If so, then indeed “no-one understands”. God would understand, of course, and so would I, so that if i was saying something genuine to God in this prayer, my spirit would be edified even though everyone else was left in the dark.

I guess my concern is that it takes away from the verse that says “God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, and power, and a SOUND MIND.”

God communicates to his people. He is the talking God. We are commanded again and again to safeguard our minds, to respond to his commands and calls to repent, to dwell on the scriptures, to be transformed in the renewing of our minds.

“But if feels good” sounds more to me like a New Ager sitting under a pyramid. It’s inwardly orientated “buzz” focused — what am I getting out of it as my tongue sings away uncoherently? How am I edified by it if my mind is not built up and my heart encouraged by focusing on the very coherent word of God?

I saw a friend lose their faith over tongues. There they were, praying in tongues in a charismatic church. I visited with another closer friend of mine, and saw this High School guy I knew crying. “But it’s just ME doing it, I control it, there’s nothing miraculous about it. People in other faiths do it. It’s a load of...... “

He lost his faith. He walked out of Christianity that night, and never came back. It didn’t feel good to him.

Thanks for your thoughts Dave.

You’ve mentioned the idea of ‘sound mind’ and backed that up largely with the problems you have seen in your life with tongues. Is it fair to say that your objections are based largely on experience?

While I don’t doubt the validity of this experience or the heartbreak of watching a friend lose his faith, I wonder whether there would be equally convincing stories of people’s conversion and edification through this type of tongues?

Even if 1 Cor 14:2 isn’t hyperbole, that doesn’t necessarily mean what modern charismatics and pentecostals think is tongues actually corresponds to what Paul is talking about. In my mind, that is the problem with pentecostal and charismatic theology, it assumes that what they experience is what the Bible is talking about. What did the Corinthian church actually do? Dunno, Paul doesn’t spell it out too clearly. Might be what happened in Acts, it might not be.

....

Even if 1 Cor 14:2 isn’t hyperbole, that doesn’t necessarily mean what modern charismatics and pentecostals think is tongues actually corresponds to what Paul is talking about. In my mind, that is the problem with pentecostal and charismatic theology, it assumes that what they experience is what the Bible is talking about. What did the Corinthian church actually do? Dunno, Paul doesn’t spell it out too clearly. Might be what happened in Acts, it might not be.

So then, Lee, if the so-called pentecostal experience of tongues is not what Paul was speaking about, if it is actually something different, how do we respond to it?

Do we condemn it based on other passages or principles; support it based on other passages or principles; or treat it as something about which the Bible does not speak?

I ask because I’m thinking about the pastoral aspects of this Bible study

I think firstly, when pentecostals and charismatics want to make a big deal of it, you ask ‘how do you know that is what Paul is talking about?’ Work to help them see that maybe it is the bees knees because we have no idea really what Paul is addressing. Apart from that, have a good understanding of the place of the Spirit in the Christian’s life so that we can take the focus of nothingness (tongues and the like) and onto stuff that matters (personal holiness).

You would treat it like any other situation where someone is majoring on the minors (like whether you should have communion one a week or one a fortnight). If they make it more of a deal than it is, then you condemn it. If it’s something that people privately believe, then you would work towards helping them see the irrelevance of it but you wouldn’t take any drastic action.