“Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.”
King James Version (KJV)
St Francis's comment on 2020-04-19 03:58:12:
Excellent response! I agree that "Forbid not...." is not the final command on toungues and that a myoptic view of any scripture will always bring error or misunderstanding.
However, there are persons in the church who sadly make the crnter piece of their Christian lives communicating that "toungues" have past away and indeed all of God's ministerial gifts have past away." If I had not ever heard anyone speak in toungues I would still have faith in it because of "Forbid Not."
Chris's comment on 2020-04-18 23:54:56:
Thank you Jesse for your wise perceptions & 'correct dividing of the Word'. If I could give an illustration of a false tongue (1 Jn 4:1). At a Church meeting, that I was told about, a brother went forward to share a Word & proceeded to speak in an unlearned language. However, no one got up to interpret, so by rights he should have ceased & taken his seat. But as he continued, another in their midst listened intently & became increasingly agitated. He went forward hurriedly to the pastor/elder to immediately shut down the speaker. The elder enquired as to why he needed to do this. The man replied, that the speaker was in fact speaking in a language he understood (i.e. an actual unlearned language was being spoken), but the content of it was a series of utter blasphemies against the Living God & His Son. The question then: how can we know the Spirit behind the tongue if an interpretation is not given; is the Church edified in any way; or, is it just a 'confirmation' of an alive Church!
Jesse's comment on 2020-04-18 22:29:50:
Chris, very well said, Amen! What you just said is the reason why I believe that what is going on in our churches today is not the tongues that the bible speaks of. In fact, what is going on today as far as tongues goes, it doesn't even come close to what was happening in the early church, and the purpose God intended it to be.
My guess on why Paul said forbid not to speak in tongues was because at that time, God was giving them that ability. Therefore, at that time, it would have been right for Paul to say that.
Acts Chapter 2 is a perfect example of tongues in its proper function. The Holy Spirit fell on these men, and they spoke in tongues. What they were speaking were known languages, not known to those who were speaking, but known by those who were hearing them speak.
Most of what is going on in our churches as far as tongues goes is in complete violation of 1 Corinthians 14:22.
Chris's comment on 2020-04-18 20:07:22:
If we take "Forbid not" as a command on its own, then you are quite correct that no one should forbid the speaking in tongues under ANY circumstances. Yet, all good biblical exposition requires that all Scripture, be understood in its proper context, with the background in mind & in line with other Scriptures. To use "Forbid not" as a command to speak in tongues without restraint (unless speaking/praying in private (1 Cor 14:4)), then we demonstrate a myopic & distorted view of the subject. The use of tongues is given to the Church as one of several gifts for its edification, but if there is no one to translate, then the gift is to be withheld, as the Spirit of God leads in the service. The instructions by Paul are ample in showing the correct use of this gift, more so because of its misuse & by those who wished to demonstrate a sense of superiority over others. And then, the opponents of the gifts quote 1 Cor 13:8-10: that all gifts are now redundant; but I don't share that view.
St Francis's comment on 2020-04-17 23:04:20:
"Forbid not" means "FORBID NOT." It doesn't mean give my opinion or an accurate disputation about toungues being meaningless or interpretable, or etc.....Simply, humbly "Forbid not." What section of "Forbid not" is cofusing to you?!
Judy's comment on 2020-04-17 20:00:03:
God protected Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom so no one else would get it. After the seven years of punishment God gave it back to Nebuchadnezzar, we know this by the band of iron and copper that was put around the stump. You can find this at Daniel 4:18-37.
bob Hilt's comment on 2020-04-17 18:15:30:
I am not sure but a good guess would be his son Belshazzar in Daniel 5: 20 But when his (Nebuchadnezzar) heart was lifted up, and his mind hardened in pride, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him:
21 And he was driven from the sons of men; and his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses: they fed him with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven; till he knew that the most high God ruled in the kingdom of men, and that he appointeth over it whomsoever he will.
22 And thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this;
23 But hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of heaven; and they have brought the vessels of his house before thee, and thou, and thy lords, thy wives, and thy concubines, have drunk wine in them;
That would be my guess
Paul white's comment on 2020-04-17 15:17:34:
Who was king when Neduchadnezzar when he was a beast?
St Francis's comment on 2020-04-10 13:29:43:
I am responding to the coments:"1Cor14 is all about spiritual gifts...." No, it is not. Paul is begging the church to follow that which is important: brotherly love, ie. the love of God and Unity. Am I to be so dotrinically correct and rigid that I forsake the commandments that Jesus left us with; to love the Lord my God and my brother as well. Self indulgence mascarading as correcting an error of doctrine is Satan's favorite trick. Why do I always have a comment and an opinion that MUST BE HEARD about everything? Especially something controversial like speaking it toungues. I am here to proclaim: "cut that off, grow this out, stop doing this, start doing that.." pride. 4bid not amen
Chris's comment on 2020-04-10 02:24:37:
Of course, you're correct. However, when some speak against such manifestations of spiritual gifts, they see how it is being done outside of Biblical instruction. The chapter you quote, is filled with instruction on its permitted use. And if there is no one to interpret when a tongue is given, then he should remain silent; for the gift is given so an unbeliever has a sign from God that an unlearned language is spoken (maybe God is giving him a Word), and to the believer, the translated message from that tongue will be for mutual edification. Outside these guidelines, the gift of tongues becomes pointless and of little use in the Church.
St Francis's comment on 2020-04-09 17:17:06:
1Cor 14:39 is clear: "....forbid not to speak in toungues." So we have nothing to say about it being past away, wrong, bad, good, or whatever; we simply "forbid not."
Ronnie's comment on 2015-02-20 12:56:31:
I believe tongues have ceased. But not only tongues, but that now all prophecies from man "fail " and all knowledge has "vanished away " because that which is perfect, "the Wprd of God " which God has "magnified above all His Name " and which endureth forever. Though heaven and earth, prophecies, tongues, and knowledge of sinful men, and corrupt minds,shall pass away. The Word is the fulness of prophecy, the final tongue, fulness of knowledge. For the law came by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, the Word Who became flesh, and of His fulness have we all received. And grace for grace.
melchor tejero's comment on 2014-04-04 03:33:58:
if we truly believe the works of the holy spirit we proved that god is in us. for all the goodness God given us, we are free man in the dessert but yet we are reminded of what is wrong and right to decide what is pleasing in to his sight.
Linda's comment on 2013-08-23 10:46:39:
I don't understand it. It right or not to speak in tongues. I thought it was right but the way I am seeing this verse, it says it's not right to speak in tongues. What are they saying? Is there a difference between speaking with and/or in tongues? I am confused now. Please help as I am learning the Bible and want to know what I am learning is the truth. Thank you.
Denise's comment on 2013-05-17 01:11:09:
james gradnigo's comment on 2013-02-24 16:52:44:
It is not what I think of 1 Corinthians 14:39, but what the Bible says about it. God's written word tells us in 1 Corinthians 13:8 that tongues would cease because it was no longer needed after God's word was completed. Tongues were for unbelievers (unbelieving Israel). Tongues ceased with the completion the written Scripture. The extensive evidence of church history and the effects of tongues on human experience; the emotional extremism, the doctrinal ignorance and confusion, the divisive nature tongues, represent the pride and empty conceit generated by erratic unscriptural experience. All these point to the truth of Paul's inspired Word; tongues shall cease (1 Cor. 13:8).