Subject: josiebible, where does it say we can ask |
Bible Note: Part 1 Hi Searcher, You said, "I think in 14:5 Paul is "tongue in cheek" ... because he already said we need each part (12:12 ff)... and that not everyone speaks in tongues (12:30)." Explain 'tongue in cheek' so I can be sure I understand what you are saying. 5 Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying. "Is prophecy and tongues equal? No according to 12:27-31. Prophets is second ... tongues is second to last." I would agree that prophesy is greater than tongues due to the fact that one prophesy edifies the body and tongues without interpretation, does not. What I said was, "Look at the second part of this verse. Let me paraphrase to convey the interpretation..Greater is the message of prophesy (because it is clearly understood) than tongues UNLESS the tongues are interpreted..then they are equal with prophesy because the message in tongues is clearly understood. But what I want you to see is that Paul said UNLESS meaning all tongues may not be interpreted." Paul clearly says that prophesy is greater UNLESS tongues are interpreted..implying that tongues with interpretation are equal or at least reasonably comparable with prophesy when the interpretation is given. You said... "The gift of tongues IS NOT the only administered by the Holy Spirit at His will ... so why would Paul have even needed to write this letter of correction ... because I have already said ... they were incorrect in the application." You may be correct on this point. I do not understand this but that may be because when the Holy Spirit uses me with the gift of tongues, He clearly indicates His will to do so. 1 Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. You said... You ask "If it is a miraculous language with someone present who know the language..why is there the need for the 'gift of interpretation'?" ... It is because the rest (most) of the people didn't understand the foreign tongue ... only a some did. When some message was spoken, let us say in the language of the Medes, the rest of the church didn't understand ... so Greek (or their main language) was also spoken, by interpretation. If there was no interpretation ... the rest of the church would not be edified. 1 Corinthians 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: According to the above verses there is no indication that Paul is speaking af varying languages. He says when the unlearned or unbelievers come in what will they think? Translate:to express in another language, systematically retaining the original sense. Interpret:To explain to ones self the meaning of.2. To expound the significance of.3. To represent or render the meaning of.... Now while admittedly these two are close there is one main difference..If you speak in my language I will translate accurately, not interpret. One who interprets works as a third person..you speak, I understand because I speak the same language, then I translate to the croud. But if the message is for me, if this is the gospel preached in my language miraculously(as on Pentecost) there would be no need to interpret to otheres. |