Prophecy and Speaking in tongues

What do you all think about prophecy and speaking in tongues? Is it something for us today, or was it only applicable to New Testament church? Should we even have prophecy and tongues in our churches today? If not, why? If so, how should we do it?

Discuss!

Umm… just so you know, I started a topic for this called "Spiritual Gifts" when the forum started. If you scroll down on the "Theology Discussions" subforum, you should find it. :)

Oops! Thanks for letting me know!

Still, this Forum's topic heading is more provocative; thus, I will comment here:

@Mr. Youngman, maybe we should define the terms before we move ahead to determine whether we believe they are still in effect today or not?

What do you mean by "tongues" and by "prophecy"?

I mean the words as they are used in II Corinthians 12 and 14. Some would define prophecy as simply preaching the Word with the help of God's Spirit so that the message has greater depth and clarity. Others would tend to define it as actual fortelling of future events. Also, some would think speaking in tongues would be speaking in a foreign earthly language like the believers in Acts 2, while others would say that speaking in tongues would be a babble that is not understood unless someone would interpret.

I've heard people describe all those things you've described. Some are supported in Scripture, while others seem to be extrabiblical.

With prophecy, it does bother me that even some men I admire stretch prophecy out to simply being the preaching of God's Word. I don't find this supported much in Scripture, and it seems to be better captured by titles such as, preacher, pastor, elder, evangelist, etc. In fact, why didn't the "Preacher" in Ecclesiastes call himself the "Prophet" instead, if it's really the "prophet" who proclaims God's Word??

I think, particularly in the Old Testament, prophecy is a foretelling of future events. Now, some prophets also preached, but preaching and proclaiming God's Word doesn't seem to necessarily make one a prophet automatically. Yet, whenever future events are being foretold, that person is either called or referred to as a "prophet" or "seer."

Thus, if we view "prophets" in this traditional sense, I think it can be successfully argued that the gift of prophecy is no longer needed today, because we have the finished work of prophecy in Scripture. There's nothing more that needs to be foretold; however, a man may proclaim God's already-written prophecies to others and, I suppose, kinda' be considered a "prophet," though he's proclaiming nothing knew that the Scripture doesn't already foretell. (As an aside, I've continually wondered whether this resurgence of calling some men "modern-day prophets" doesn't stem from this redefining of what a prophet has traditionally meant, predominantly and particularly in the OT, just to justify the argument that prophecy is still alive and well today.?)

As for tongues, I agree with the definitions of both renderings you present, but, and I think you proved the point in your renderings, only one rendering seems to be Biblically-based. Whenever tongues by humans are exhibited in Scripture (predominantly the NT), each and every time, it is the speaking of a foreign tongue. Though Paul may not explicitly state this when drawing out some guidelines for the use of tongues in the worship services of the 1st century church in 1 Corinthians 12 &14, this doesn't leave it open for any other interpretation than what the rest of Scripture always refers to when addressing toungues, which is that they're foreign in nature. Whether it's the disciples at Pentecost or Cornelius with Peter, the gift of tongues was used by God to communicate to both the proclaimers of the gospel, as well as others around them, that the gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles, and was no longer just of the Jews.

I do believe, then, that the gift of tongues has ceased, along with prophecy; but, unlike prophecy, which has no relevance now that we have the complete Word of God, I will not rule out that God could still use the gift of tongues within someone who needs to proclaim the gospel to a people group for which there is not enough time to learn their language to adequately proclaim it to them. Do I think this happens much? Not at all; but I could never in good conscience rule it out like I feel confident in doing with prophecy.

As for the babbling. I used to have many friends from Pentecostal and Charismatic backgrounds who would argue with me that there are supernatural languages that can be attained if we pray for them. I, being the fundamental Baptist I was in my youth, would always retort: Show me THAT in Scripture, and then we can dialogue. They would, without fail, go to 1 Corinthians 13:1 and Romans 8:26, and proceed in performing a hermeneutical massacre of the texts, stating that Paul could speak with the tongues of angels (! Cor. 13:1) AND that the Holy Spirit teaches us an unspeakable language (sounds like an oxymoron, doesn't it?), according to Rom. 8:26.

For 1 Corinthians 13:1, I would simply ask, "how did Paul die?" They would say that he died by beheading (the traditional account). Then, I would ask, "Then how come it says he died by being burned to death in 1 Corinthians 13:3?" To which they would say, "Well, he didn't actually give his body to be burned. It was a hypothetical statement." To which I would say, "Exactly! Which is also the case in verse 1. Paul spoke no angelic tongue. He was only saying that if he did, but did not have love, it would be irritating noise." They wouldn't accept my point, but it is nonetheless the point that must be made with those first 3 verses; they are hypothetical.

As for Romans 8:26, I always took their rendering of this verse as "grasping for straws," because the verse itself plainly says that the Holy Spirit utters words that we cannot utter; yet, for many, they seem to think they can attain a special exemption here if they can transcend to a higher level of spirituality, and, thus, speak the words of the Holy Spirit.

My response was always: "You can't speak that which It says you can't utter." There's no Biblical basis for any of the other renderings.

Personally, I have never found a basis in my spiritual walk for needing to foretell the future (though I admit it would be cool), nor have I needed to ever speak the gospel, or impart spiritual truth, in a foreign language to someone who speaks in a different language. My experience, however, does not dictate what is right or wrong. My point is that if God had more of the future to foretell, I believe He would have done it in His finished Word. If He wants someone to go to a people group, He will provides the means for that "sent one" to speak their language.

Who gets the glory if we try to say we can speak an angel's language or the Holy Spirit's unspeakable tongue? I think THAT answer shows what's at the heart of those who say they can do either of these.

@WM Interesting thought. Now I would like to ask the question: what was Paul talking about when he says "Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful"? If he is talking about a foreign language, why would a preacher preach to a congregation in a foreign language? Now, I am not saying that preachers should not be allowed to preach if they do not speak the same language that their audience does. Rather, I am wondering why he is stressing this point if all it is referring to is interpreting from a foreign language. Also, how can you pray in a foreign language, but not understand yourself?

Just interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject.

Ah, yes. I forgot to address those verses.

First, it's been the subject of debate for centuries about whether Paul was addressing the pastors who "speak," or if he was addressing the assembly themselves. His following advice about only having two to three people speak in tongues per service seems to indicate that he was addressing the congregation in general, and not the pastor specifically.

With that in mind, I believe Paul is talking to those in the congregation who were suddenly speaking in a foreign language unknown to anyone else, including the person speaking. It is further argued from some who say that the disciples at Pentecost couldn't understand the language they were speaking, but only heard themselves speaking in their native tongue, yet others present around them understood them in their own foreign tongue. In the Corinthian church, it seems that some members were gifted with the gift of a foreign tongue, but no one who spoke that language was around who either spoke that tongue or could interpret it for them, causing Paul to tell them to keep silent unless an interpreter was present. The interpreter then would let everyone know what was being said; but there's nothing to indicate, at least based on the other examples in Scripture, that the "unknown tongue" was of an angelic or Holy Spirit language; instead, in congruence with other passages, the "unknown tongue" was simply unknown to everyone present.

(Of course, this makes us scratch our heads as to why the Holy Spirit would gift someone at that moment with a foreign tongue that no one else around could speak or interpret; but there's also the feasible interpretation that those persons who were continually doing that, creating an atmosphere of confusion, may have been fabricating their experience to draw attention to themselves. This could be why Paul "lays down the law" that if anyone had a tongue to share, it must only be spoken in the presence of an interpreter (which would also help to weed out the attention-seeking, glory-mongers) and, even then, with the limits of only 2-3 people a service.)

Those 2 chapters in 1 Corinthians are quite difficult to exegete, but doing so in light of what we already know in other passages will keep us from creating new doctrines that, consciously or unconsciously, promote the pursuit of heightened emotional experiences. We see many movements today that endorse seizure-like activities–all based on the premise that the closer we are to the Spirit, the more we will have bodily experiences that are indescribable, like uncontrollable gyrations, angelic tongues, time-traveling visions (past and future), and other naturally attention-gaining experiences.

I think Paul had to rein in a lot of outrageous behaviors in the Corinthian church, some wicked (like the incestual professing Christian, the litigious believers suing others in the church, or those not taking Communion properly, resulting in sicknesses and deaths) and others just working out their salvation (like those struggling with whether to marry or not during the great persecutions or those speaking in tongues or prophesying but lacking love). The danger for us is to draw doctrines that are not congruent with the rest of Scripture from passages addressing specific issues occurring within a specific body of believers. We can draw general principles, but not contradictory doctrines that, if they were so important, would have been mentioned many more times in other Pauline epistles.

So, as I said, while I rule out modern-day prophecies, I can't rule out the use of foreign tongues that God can use to edify or even save those who speak that language. As for angelic or Holy Spirit languages being the "unknown tongues," that's a dangerous connection to make when none of God's greatest patriarchs or apostles ever spoke of or performed such acts.

The better rendering seems to be the time-limited aspect of these gifts, used by God to make sure that the gospel spread to the entire world of that time. It only makes sense that the growing churches back then would have a use for prophecies and tongues. Today's churches? Not really at all.

Well stated, Sir Wretched. I am interested, though, in hearing your opinion about the New Testament prophet Agabus. In Acts 11, he prophesied of a great dearth that was to come to pass in the future. Also, in Acts 21, he foretold Paul's arrest by the Jews in Jerusalem. Is this prophecy applicable to us today?

Question: why are we leaving out word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, and discerning of spirits?

I agree with God and Paul:

"I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied." (I Corinthians 14:5).

Those who say prophecies and tongues are done away with cite I Cor. 13:8:

"Love never fails; but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away."

Logically, if prophecies have failed and tongues have ceased, then knowledge has also vanished away. That doesn't work. Paul is not saying that these things ARE done away with but simply emphasizing the eternalness and steadfastness of love. Prophecies, tongues, and knowledge are only tools to intimately know and make known Love. All point to Love.

Christians today are too often afraid of the Holy Spirit. However, if the Spirit wants to use me for prophecy and/or tongues, who am I to limit Him? Who knows what blessings I may be missing if I do not surrender this area of my life to Him?

(There do seem to be different types of tongues in Scripture: speaking in foreign languages without knowing the language so that others may know truth, as the apostles in Acts did; and speaking in tongues no one understands, as I Cor. discusses. It is also clear that when someone does speak in tongues, there MUST be interpretation. There is also praying in tongues, which is private.)

If God wants to work in someone's life through prophecy, tongues, or any other gifts of the Spirit, then - yay, God! Go God! He is the same God who was present in Scripture. He has not changed. Will you let Him use you?

Erica -
I don't believe I have ever heard that said so well and so succinctly! I appreciate what you said, and the spirit in which it was said.

I would really like to pick the brains of the top memorizers, because I am writing software that is designed to help us memorize, review, and retain for life the Scriptures that we learn.

Would it be possible to get some of your thoughts? I have already had the good fortune to get to know Twilah, John Project, and the Pentimone family.

My email address is truemacguy@gmail.com. Please let me know if you are interested in sharing some of your thoughts with me. Thank you.