I don't want to offend anyone with this post, and I hope I don't.
I grew up in a cessationist denomination. That is, we didn't believe that extremely demonstrative spiritual gifts like tongues, healing, etc happened in our modern church age, since we have the complete Bible. Since we have the Bible, we don't need extra revelation outside of the Bible.
I went to a charismatic high school (private Christian school). I observed some things that were strange to me. Unfortunately, some of the kids I knew who did things like speaking in tongues, falling down on the ground, laughing (laughing and barking were popular back then in the charismatic world) were also very mean and hypocritical. I still didn't have a very high opinion of this type of behavior, and I didn't see why we needed it today.
As far as I know from the history I've read, the church practiced both tongues and glossolalia in the New Testament church. Sometimes after that, though...they stopped. There are a few references in the 2nd century, but it's pretty vague. Mormons did it in the early days of their church. Then Pentecostals started doing it about 100 years ago in their church services, and everyone did it. Now charismatics do it. Good or bad, it DOES influence the whole church in the West.
It happened in the New Testament, for sure. There are two different kinds, actual tongues (at Pentecost, people hearing in their own languages) and people using glossolalia (ecstatic utterances). Glossolalia was also practiced by the mystery religions and pagans before the time of Christ. All of the occurrences in the New Testament spread the gospel of Christ or edified the believers in some way. St. Paul is pretty adamant that when someone speaks in another language in church (tongues) that someone else know what he is saying and translate/interpret. In the few charismatic churches I've been in, I've never seen this happen. I'm sure it does sometimes, but I haven't seen it. Mostly it's people nattering on to themselves in worship, or sometimes the minister will do it in the microphone while he's talking/singing. This last kind makes me angry because of what Paul says.
My big question is this: Why did people speak in tongues in the New Testament, but not the rest of history (except for infrequent times here and there)? Why did people receive the Holy Spirit subsequent to belief in Christ then, but now we believe that receiving the Holy Spirit IS our salvation? I know there are answers, but I don't have a pastor to ask. None of my friends has given me a satisfactory answer, and some people have gotten very angry with me asking.
(about the sign picture at the top- I don't think it's good to have a sign up sheet or offer to give someone a spiritual gift. Spiritual gifts are from the Holy Spirit...no one decides who gets what but Him. I wasn't there were the pic was taken. I hope it was a conference
about those things, not an offer to help people speak in tongues)
Do you have an answer? What's the difference between when the Holy Spirit came to the disciples and when the Holy Spirit comes into our lives today? Why didn't the disciples speak in tongues beforehand, and why do some Christians do it today?
True
Comments (38)
Don't know, but speaking in tongues is pretty much what turned me off toward the the whole thing.
Are you asking questions just to argue a point? Hope not.
Biblical tongues is only defined one place in the Bible. That is in Acts 2. It's always a language. One that follows the laws of grammar, not gibberish. As you said in your post, Paul got upset at the Corinthian church because they were mistaking the gift of tongues for gibberish (they were abusing their salvations).
If tongues exists today we must ask what it is before we decide how to use it. We look to Scripture for the definition and it's there!
If you would like more information please listen to this teaching: http://www.gty.org/Shop/Audio+Lessons/1871_The-Truth-About-Tongues-Part-1
There are four other parts to the teaching. Maybe you can listen to those too!
Maff
I've always thought that speaking tongues is the ability that God gives you to speak in another language when people who speak that language are around to understand (ie: Pentecost). It's like a missionary because able to miraculously speak the language of the people. It's always edifying and there is always a translator.
The Bible never says that everyone should speak in tongues. In fact, it never says that everyone receives the gift of tongues when they receive the Holy Spirit. It's a gift of the Spirit that only certain people receive...just like teaching, preaching, prophecy, etc...Paul even says that it's a lesser gift.
But, yes, it also makes me angry when pastors speak into a microphone in front of everyone in some random tongue. That's not biblical, as you've pointed out, because no one is translating. How does that edify the body?
But, all of that aside, I don't think there is any difference between when the Spirit came to the disciples and when the Spirit comes into our lives today. The spirit chooses who to give the gift to and people use it how they will (whether it be unbiblically or not). Some churches have taken it waaay to far and said that you have to speak in tongues to be saved. It NEVER says that anywhere in scripture. That is false doctrine and false gospel.
Peace:)
-Tesia
@Maffblaster@xanga - If I wanted to argue a point, I'd just make a point and argue it. My mind's not 100% made up.
Amy, like you, I had serious questions about modern-day tongues. Like you, most of my introduction and earliest exposure to tongues was negative! And most of the answers I received from others were absolutely useless! But when my own godly mother confided in me how God blessed her with her own "prayer language," I knew I had to seek the truth about tongues from The Truth Himself. I will tell you very simply that since then God has revealed Himself to me on a very deep and personal level using my own verbalization s, which sound like complete gibberish to my mind but which open my spirit to His Spirit in a wonderful way.
I know from reading your blogs that you like me greatly desire to be a more effective witness for Christ. I suggest to you tongues and the other gifts listed in scripture are intended for that purpose. And satan is working hard to interfere with that.
If you wish, you can read about my initial, personal experiences with this "gift" (better translated manifestation) of the Holy Spiritat http://www.jerusalemhill.net. If you wish, I will be very willing to go into greater detail with you by email, so long as you don't call me reverend
But beyond my personal experiences, may I share with you that I found more understanding from prayerfully reading, studying and contemplating three chapters of scripture: 1st Corinthians chapters 12, 13 and 14, read together as one complete idea of the Apostle Paul. (One example of this is my recent blog about Christian love paraphrasing the opening verses of chapter 13 from the Amplified Version.) Read these chapters with fresh eyes and an open heart and mind. Let the Lord do as He promised to do, lead you personally into all truth. And to Him be all the glory and honor!
...
I believe there is still a true gift of tongues today but I also believe that much of what is passed off as real tongues, are not real. I used to do this myself when I first got saved and falsely believed I was speaking in tongues, which are KNOWN languages. But After studying what the bible truly teaches on this, I realized that I was just making up nonsensical words and it wasn't true tongues. After I quit doing this, I became much stronger in my faith because I relied more on God's word and prayers that I could understand, instead of make believe words.
I said that I still believe there's a true gift today. There's a lady I know that grew up in a small village in Alaska that had their own language. A missionary came there and started to speak in their tongue and told them the gospel of salvation and this lady got saved. Afterwards they asked him how he knew their language and he said that he didn't know what they were talking about. he thought he was speaking in English the whole time.
There are two different kinds, actual tongues (at Pentecost, people hearing in their own languages) and people using glossolalia (ecstatic utterances)
.
That's not true. There's only one greek word for tongues, glossalalia. This is the only word used and is the same word that is used for every verse on tongues.
@Maffblaster@xanga - Biblical tongues is only defined one place in the Bible. That is in Acts 2. It's always a language.
That's correct as I explained above.
@t_sheffield@xanga - I've always thought that speaking tongues is the ability that God gives you to speak in another language when people who speak that language are around to understand (ie: Pentecost). It's like a missionary because able to miraculously speak the language of the people.
Again, that's correct as I explained above.
Here are my answers for you, from the Bible:
"And afterward, I will pour out My Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions." ~ Joel 2:28, NIV
"But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." ~ Acts 1:8, NIV
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper (Holy Spirit; also called Counselor) will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you." ~ John 16:7, NKJV
"And with that He (Jesus) breathed on them and said, 'Receive the Holy Spirit.'" ~ John 20:22, NIV
"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified." ~ 1 Cor. 14:5, NIV
"Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues." ~ 1 Cor. 14:39, NIV
After a couple of beers, anyone can speak in tongues....!
I will start out by saying that I am a Messianic Jew and I do "speak in tongues". I will also say that there is a lot of BS revolving the issue in the modern church today. Because of the lack of understanding of the difference. There are actually about 5 DIFFERENT instances that occur in the church world that most people all group together as "speaking in tongues". That's why so many people get confused. First off the Holy Spirit (i.e. speaking in tongues, falling down, laughing, barking, whatever) DOES NOT EQUAL SALVATION. It is a gift or tool given to those already saved that they can choose to use or not use to deepen their relationship with God. There are a lot of people who speak gibberish to "show-off" their spirituality, and then there are people who are hit with a prophetic word that is then interpreted by someone else. If someone interprets their own prophecy they're full of it - the Bible is very clear on this. They're is also the gift of speaking in other tongues, which is when you are supernaturally given the ability whether it be temporary or permanent to speak fluently in another language that is legitimate and established elsewhere in the world (i.e. German, Spanish, Hebrew, etc...) The fourth instance is when people "pray in the spirit" This is when people invoke the Holy Spirit or are involuntarily overwhelmed with a call to intercession about something they don't know how to pray about, or what specifically to pray for. This can come out in many different forms from random words, to gibberish, to other languages, or even moans and groans. This is the physical act of yearning for a spiritual change and it is completely legitimate and a liberating experience - this however is no indication of the depth of their walk with the Lord, nor is it a proof of Salvation seeing as how God can speak through the mouth of a donkey - the Holy Spirit can use any earthen vessel that is willing, regardless of your state of living. Lastly, Paul talks about speaking in the "tongues of Angels" - This is the ONLY instance that should hold th connotations most people have of "Speaking in Tongues". And it is a gift that ANYONE can receive but not everyone does. It's basically letting Christ within you, fuel the prayer and direction of focus for a physically track-able time period.
I know it all sounds confusing and maybe even a little absurd but I have seen and believe in the existence of all of these things from personal experience - with that said - if you disagree it will not affect your "closeness" with the Lord, it will not affect your Salvation, and it is no indication of your spiritual maturity. It's simply a preference. Same thing as choosing to drive a car or a truck, if it suits you better - do it, if not, leave it alone.
I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I have done EXTENSIVE research in many charismatic and controversial aspects of Christianity and I would be happy to try and explain better or answer any other questions you might have.
One of the many things that turned me off to christianity when I was a child was when my parents left the catholic church and my grandmother talked them into going fundie. It all happened so fast; we were in these reverent, dignified, beautiful church services one week, and the next we were in a service with people twiching on the floor and screeching gibberish. It was quite a shock to my system.
'Speaking in tongues' is not a language. Example:
OH MALALALALALALAAAAAAAAAA GIB NAMAMAMAMA NIM NIM NIM KYYYYYYYLEELEELEE
If I'm wrong, somebody translate that for me. I heard that at top volume every time I went to church for years. In fact, I thought there was something wrong with me because I not only didn't feel moved to scream like a maniac and twitch on the floor, I found it painfully embarrassing and undignified (even as a child I knew that wasn't a language and it humiliated me to see people doing it).
@GreatestGuyEver@xanga - I totally agree with everything you wrote here. My experiences and understanding are similar. I greatly appreciate your comments since my own seemed to me woefully inadequate.
@Sionainne@xanga -
Please remember that satan is the author of confusion. And satan is at work within the church.
I am no authority on speaking in tongues or the Holy Spirit, this is a personal account of what happened to me. Right now I'm doing a study on the Holy Spirit so that I can begin to understand what is and what has been happening to me, and to be able to receive and clearly understand the Holy Spirit by myself.
I've spoken in tongues 3 times in my lifetime. I am 23. The first time I spoke in tongues was when I first received the Holy Spirit in a way that I couldn't deny. I can't remember how old I was, but I was probably no older than 11. I went to a church where people spoke in tongues and were slain regularly, and I can remember wondering if it's something they learned to do or if it was something that just happened. I remember wanting answers for many things and wanting to know God better and trying to open myself up to experience him for myself in a real way, instead of it always being filtered through someone else...if that makes sense. So one day, in Children's Church, there was a couple ladies praying for us kids. Voluntarily we would get up, they would lay their hands on us, and pray. Other kids were playing around with it, and I thought before I went up that I wasn't going to play around, that I was going to be serious about it. I went up, she layed her hands on me, and began to pray. I felt really hot and began to sob uncontrollably. I kind of blocked out everything and just cried and sobbed loudly. During my crying I heard the ladies voice tell me to listen to myself. I then did what she instructed and I heard that my crying, which I didn't really think much about except that I was sobbing loudly, was actually me speaking in tongues. After I calmed down she told me that I spoke in tongues and that was my language from God.
Both the 2nd and 3rd times I spoke in tongues were within the last 4 months or so. So that's about 12 years after my first time. Before then I was lost in my walk, actually, my relationship was pretty much nonexistent. I really wanted to get back into my faith and strengthen my relationship with God. One day, I was at church and the visiting minister began to prophecy. The Holy Spirit was moving and I began to worship. I was crying and was saying "Thank You Jesus. Hallelujah"...but soon those words turned into tongues. It was involuntary. The 3rd time was a few months after (about a month ago in December) after I had just finished ministering with the Dance Ministry. We had finished our piece and began to worship, and then I started speaking in tongues. I was also "slain" (I think) twice in the last 4 months.
I really don't know what all of that means, yet. My spiritual mother told me that I have a sensitive and submissive spirit and so it is easy for me to receive the Holy Spirit and be used in that manner (I guess?). Anyways, she gave me a book that I'm reading and it's helping me in my study of the Holy Spirit.
Anyways, that's my personal experience with speaking in tongues. I don't know if that helps you understand a little more or not, but that's what happened to me. If anyone else has any links or can offer any advice to me, I'd be open to that, too.
@Sionainne@xanga - I was confused by it, too when I was young. I didn't know why they did it, if they learned it, if it just happened, or what. I invite you to read my comment about my experience with speaking in tongues. I'm not trying to "convert" you or anything, maybe it will just help your understanding of it by reading a personal experience with it.
@merquryd@xanga - Sure! I'd love for someone to explain it.
@Sionainne@xanga - lol. When you read my comment above, you'll see that I don't really explain it, I just kind of tell what happened to me. I can't really "explain" it. I have limited understanding. Though @GreatestGuyEver@xanga has a comment above that actually helped me. I think what I was doing was the involuntary praying. I kind of new after the 2nd and 3rd times I spoke in tongues that it had to probably deal with the Holy Spirit interceding on my behalf since I wanted to talk to God and pray but didn't know what to pray for or how to pray for it. You're welcome to ask me more about my experiences with it, but I don't know if it will explain anything.
God decides what gifts to give us each individually. We can always pray and ask for specific ones, but ultimately God decides what he wants to give us. I've never met a Christian who didn't have at least one gift of some kind. Some have more, some have less.
As for tongues, it is a "heavenly" language. And for those who have this gift, they are instructed to not speak it in public unless there is an interpreter. I have seen it before...and there was a speaker and interpreter. My guess for why we haven't seen a lot of it? Because they didn't know an interpreter and were afraid to go against what Paul said. Or, they were afraid of being considered insane and locked up. I have a friend who has this gift and I never even knew it until we started talking about spiritual gifts one day. She prays in tongues...but never with others because she was afraid there wasn't an interpreter. She was also afraid of other Christians thinking she was crazy.
@frostbitpanda@xanga - I believe this to be the most correct answer. lol
In all honesty though, no matter what we believe, we just put too much emphasis, effort, and resources on speaking in tongues. You would think it would be more important to go out and share the Gospel, help those in need, and maintain a pure heart, through OBEDIENCE to God's commandments. Unfortunately I believe most people get it wrong when they start to idolize it, calling upon it as though it does away with sinning and hypocrisy.
@SpokenThruScott@xanga - Right. And I'm starting to think that if it were a MAJOR deal in the New Testament (like a major part of their spiritual life) that it would be talked about a LOT more. It seems like we are assumed to know things that just aren't explained.
I did a study on this, I'm glad to see you are thinking about this as well... it's always good to think through what we believe. I know we haven't always seen eye to eye so I do apologize for my inane rantings from time to time. So, that said, here's my study on it and take it with a grain of salt considering where it came from (me).
Are the Tongues in 1 Cor.14 the same as those in 1 Acts 2?
For
a long time I have wondered just exactly what were the tongues spoken
of in 1 Corinthians chapter 14. My problems occurred because I assumed
that in order to think that it was normal, real, human languages that
were being spoken of, that must have meant it was not supernatural.
This assumption is what kept me from thinking 1 Cor.14 could be talking
about normal human languages. Upon closer inspection, the gift of
tongues appears to be the miraculous ability to speak in a previously
unlearned, normal human language.
One other assumption that was keeping me from accepting this was I assumed that the speaker
understood what he was saying while speaking the previously unknown
language. This is evidently not so, because interpretation is something
that apparently does not come automatic, but should be prayed for, (1
Cor. 14:3). There is no evidence that in Acts 2 the disciples
understood what they were saying, but the people listening to them
fully understood.
In
1 Corinthians 14:2, I thought it could not be like the experience of
Acts 2 because I thought Acts 2 was a miraculous event where you spoke
your own language, and everybody else heard their own language. The
problem with that would be that 1 Cor. 14:2 says that he who speaks in
a tongue no one understands, and he speaks mysteries in the spirit...
how could that be if you were speaking your own language and everybody
else heard their own? But the thing is, Acts doesn't teach that at all!
In Acts 2:4 it just says plainly that they began to speak other
languages (tongues) as the spirit gave them utterance. So if in 1
Cor.14:2 it was talking about a real human language being miraculously
spoken, why didn't the hearers understand? The reason for that is, that
for one, the people in Corinth did not speak a wide variety of foreign
languages like those in Acts 2. They would have not understood the
language being spoken.
When
Paul was addressing this problem, that he was fully aware that people
were using this gift of the miraculous speaking of foreign languages
(tongues) and not even praying for a miraculous gift of interpretation
so that they could explain the meaning of the message. It also appears
they were using the gift when there were no speakers of that language
present, because Paul has to tell them the purpose of tongues, which is
a sign to unbelievers who do not speak their language. And so Paul
said, "He who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men, but to God. Indeed,
no one understands him; in the spirit he speaks mysteries". Does this
mean that "tongues" therefore must be a garbled non-language? I don't
think so at all because there are two cases in which people do
understand: 1) They are native speakers of that language and 2) The
language is miraculously interpreted by someone who does not speak it.
It was impossible that he who spoke in an uninterpreted language could
be understood, therefore the Apostle stressed in the chapter the need
for the miraculous gift of interpretation. No one understood him unless
there was interpretation. No matter what your view about the nature of
tongues is, whether that be ecstatic speech or actual languages, the
phrases "speaks not to men but to God", "no one understands him", and
"speaks mysteries", is only true if there is no interpretation. If
there is interpretation, people understand, the person speaks to men,
and the mysteries are made known. How weak do today's claims look,
which say that usually interpretation of someone's speaking in a
non-language consists of a strong feeling
of what they said, or repeating whatever pops into your mind. This
falls far short of the impressive miracle of speaking an actual
language you have never learned, and the miraculous understanding and
interpreting of a language you have never learned.
One last
question about this verse was why would God speak to them in a foreign
language if he knew they could not understand it? The answer to that is
found in verse 22, where Paul says tongues were given for a sign to
unbelievers. Speaking in a nonsensical language would not have been
much of a sign, or someone interpreting the gibberish, because anybody
could claim that! Also, it is apparent that during those times,
speaking gibberish was very common in pagan religions.
Why would God use something like paganism for a sign to unbelievers?
But If you were an unbeliever, and heard someone speaking in your own
language, and then saw someone who didn't even know your language
interpret it, now that would be a sign!
Acts
2 shows that what was being spoken clearly was known human languages.
Remember that all of the disciples were there and began to speak in
previously unlearned languages.
Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in
his own language.
7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
8 And how hear we every man IN OUR OWN TONGUE, wherein we were born?
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
Here
it is interesting to note that the tongues spoken of in Corinthians is
apparently the same as those in Acts! Notice the language, it says
different kinds of languages were used...
1 Corinthians 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another DIVERSE KINDS OF TONGUES; to another the interpretation of tongues:
1
Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles,
secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts
of healings, helps, governments, DIVERSITIES OF TONGUES.
It is also interesting how Iranaeus, who was one of the earliest defenders of the Christian faith and a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John, referred to Paul and others as speaking in many foreign languages by the spirit. Irenaeus (A.D. 115 to 202) a pupil of Polycarp (A.D. 70-155), who was himself a disciple of the Apostle John, wrote:
"[T]he
perfect man consists in the commingling and the union of the soul
receiving the spirit of the Father… For this reason does the apostle
declare, 'We speak wisdom among them that are perfect,' terming those
persons 'perfect' who have received the Spirit of God,
and who through the Spirit of God do speak in all languages, as he used
[h]imself also to speak. In like manner we do also hear many brethren
in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit
speak all kinds of languages… whom also the Apostle terms 'spiritual,'
they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit." (Irenaeus,
Against Heresies, 5.6.1, ANF, I, 531.) The brethren Irenaeus refers to
are apparently people speaking in languages during Paul's day.
It
is amazing to see how the earliest church documents referring to the
nature of tongues in Acts and Corinthians refer to tongues as the
miraculous ability to speak a real, previously unlearned language.
Apparently this understanding has been the majority view of the
commentators since the beginning of the church. St. John Chrysostom (A.D. 347-407), who was Archbishop of Constantinople, wrote: "Whoever was baptized in apostolic days, he straightway spake with tongues... and one straight way spake in the Persian language, another in the Roman, another in the Indian, another in some
other tongue, and this made manifest to them that were without that it was the Spirit in the very person speaking." (John Chrysostom,
Homilies on First Corinthians, 29, NPNF, 1st ser., XII, 168.) Note well
that this discussion by Chrysostom was concerning tongue speaking in 1
Cor.12 and there is no intimation at all that he thought tongue
speaking was speaking in a non-language. To him there was no difference
between the tongues in Acts and those in 1 Corinthians. St. Augustine,
(354-430A.D.) wrote: "In the earliest times, the Holy Ghost fell upon
them that believed: and they spake with tongues, which they had not
learned, as the Spirit gave them utterance." These were signs adapted
to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit
in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of God was to run through all
tongues over the whole earth." (Augustine, "Ten Homilies on the First
Epistle of John," Philip Schaff, ea., The Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Vol. 7 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), 497)
It
is also a well known fact of history that pagan religions during the
time of the early church spoke in a non-language and thus claimed
communication with a higher deity. The Encyclopedia Britannica states,
"The gift of tongues and their interpretation was not peculiar to the Christian church,
but was a repetition in it of a phase common to ancient religions".
This statement of the encyclopedia is an ungodly one, and the intent of
it is to discount Christian claims of having contact with God. They are
saying that what was done in Christianity during the days of the
apostles proves nothing, for that very same practice was done by pagan
religions also. However, there are no references in the writings of the
early church fathers that show that they believed speaking in tongues consisted of unintelligible speech, for the real gift was nothing like the
speaking of a non-language common in paganism, which can be found in Greek pagan religion
such as the Thyracian Dionysus, the Delphic Phrygia, and the Sibyls.
(Behm, "glossa" TDNT, 1:722.) Also, Plato said that men attain
prophetic truth only when the "intelligence is enthralled in a deep
sleep, or he is demented by some distemper or possession." (Plato,
Timaeus, 71-72.)
It has been said by some charismatics that
finding proof for tongues (or the ceasing of them) in early church
history is ambiguous. Groups often claimed to have practiced tongues
are Montanists (A.D. 160), Camisards and Cevenols, Jansenists, Radical
Anabaptists, Irvingites, and others, but to read about them it is not
clear exactly what they were saying. It may have been that they were
copying paganism, such as the ideas of Plato and the others mentioned,
which is indeed possible because it is a known fact that the writings
of Plato and others had a profound effect on the Church in its history.
It is also possible that they were prophesying "dark sayings" or
"nonsense" that was real language but had no clear meaning. Also,
groups such as the Cevenols are reported to have spoke in tongues that
were in languages, and poor language (a bad attempt at trying to speak
the French of the Huguenot Bible) according to Alexander Mackie.
Difficulty obviously arises like this if a group is trying to speak in
an unlearned language (having some idea how it sounds) and since they
do not have the spirit, they speak gibberish. If this was the case,
were they trying to speak in tongues as modern adherents do today?
Obviously not, although it would look the same as the tongues alleged
today. This and other factors make the matter somewhat ambiguous.
The interpretation that 1Cor.14 is referring to a non-language became popular with the liberal "higher criticism
movement" of the 18th and 19th century, (I have not been able to even
find any statements in church commentators prior to this time that say
tongue speaking occurred in a non-language.) because they wanted to
remove supernatural elements out of the Bible. (Joseph Dillow,
"Speaking in Tongues" Zondervan, 1975). Speaking real, previously
unlearned languages was just a little too miraculous for them, but the
non-language used by pagans required no miracle. Thus Paul's speaking in other tongues
was equated with the vain babbling of pagan shamans. And so the way was
paved for the pentecostal movement, which began by a group of people
who had a "second blessing" theology. They wanted a physical sign so
they could know they had a second blessing (second blessing is
referring to reaching a special state of perfection or sanctification)
and this interpretation is what shaped their thinking on the physical
sign of speaking in a non-language as evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Thus modern pentacostalism was born in the early
1900's at Azuza Street.
My conclusion is that the tongues in the book of 1 Corinthians 14
are not different from those in Acts 2, and that they were the
miraculous ability to speak in a previously unknown language, not a
non-language or gibberish.
A close look at 1 Cor. chapter 14:
1
Corinthians 14:2 "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh
not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in
the spirit he speaketh mysteries." Here this does not prove at all that
the language is garbled, non understandable speach, but merely that it
is not understood. What he is speaking is miraculously from God in a
foreign language, but a mystery to the hearers, who do not speak that
language. So many people assume that there are two different kinds of
tongues in the Bible, when the apostle Paul
explicitly states in this very same book to the Corinthians that
tongues are different languages, various kinds of languages, not a
specific kind of heavenly, exalted language. That real foreign
languages are being spoken of is so clear that there are even some
pentacostal commentators who interpret this as the same. Yes indeed,
some of them believe in tongues as strictly the ability to speak
miraculously a foreign language. (Anthony Hoekema, "What about Tongue
speaking?" Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966, pg.43)
Verse
4, "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he
that prophesieth edifieth the church." Here so much doctrine is built
by many to say that tongues is so much needed today, and that we can
hardly live a blessed life without it. These people say this despite
the fact that the Bible clearly says all will not speak in tongues,
(and it is a twisting of scripture to say that that means "all will not
speak in tongues in the assembly, but all should speak in tongues.")
The meaning of this verse is clear. Those that were speaking
in tongues
were edifying themselves in a negative way. In 1 Corinthians 8:10, the
greek word "edify" which means to build up, is used in a negative way.
The word is there translated "emboldened". The person's conscience was
"built up" so that they sinned. In Corinthians 14, they were using
tongues to look good and spiritual in front of others, and not even
praying for the gift of interpretation so that others would be edified.
This is the entire point of this chapter. So in actuality, 1
Corinthians verse 4 is not refering to how much tongues benefits you,
actually it is a rebuke. This is also consistent with the Biblical
principle that the purpose for God's gifts to us is for the benifit of
others, not ourselves. When we do benefit, it is the result of serving
others.
1 Corinthians 14:5 "I would that ye all spake
with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that
prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret,
that the church may receive edifying." Here Paul is not setting down
the teaching that everyone should speak in tongues and have this as
their goal, as this contradicts 1 Cor 12:29-30. He is just saying that
it would be great if everyone did speak in tongues, because there is
nothing wrong with the gift itself if it was used properly and had many
benefits to others. Imagine being able to speak to anyone in their own
language and tell them of the saviour! He has been rebuking them so far
in the chapter, and he doesn't want them to misunderstand as saying it
was wrong to use the gift. This is also why he says "do not forbid
speaking in tongues" in verse 39.
1
Corinthians 14:13 "Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown
tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown
tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." Here
verse 13 shows us that the people in Corinth did not understand the
language spoken, as it was foreign to them. Verse 14 tells us that the
speaker while able to speak the language, did not have the ability to
understand it. That had to be prayed for, because the gift of
interpretation was a seperate gift (1Cor.12:30) and as verse 13 says,
the speaker needed to pray that he would be able to interpret his
message. If not himself interpret, than someone else must, 1 Cor 14:27.
1
Corinthians 14:15 "What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I
will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and
I will sing with the understanding also." Verse 15 is interpreted by
some that we should sometimes pray with our minds, and sometimes not,
meaning that we should sometimes pray in a garbled non language. The
context in verse 14 shows the nature of tongues is that you do not
understand the language as you speak it, and so you would only be
praying with the spirit and not understanding. Therefore Paul asks
"what shall I do?" the rest of the verses up to verse 19 say that it
should be interpreted, and so you would then be praying with your mind
also, as it is clear that the speaker first was to pray that he may
interpret his own message. Otherwise, someone else needed to interpret,
and it would not be necessary in that circumstance to pray with your
spirit and mind if others are edified by the other's interpretation.
However it is clear that firstly it was the responsibility of the
speaker to interpret his message.
Verses
20-22 show us that the purpose for tongues is not as a sign to us
believers, to show us we are specially blessed of God, but that it was
a sign to unbelievers, and a ministry reaching out to them in their own
language.
Verses 29-31 show us that a person when
prophesying was not out of control. Again we see a difference between
many practices today, where people squirm, thrash about, and shout out.
This is entirely contrary to these verses, and deny verse 32 and verse
33, which say they are not overcome by God's spirit when they received
a revelation, but rather were in control.
@NightCometh@xanga - Pay close attention to 1 Corinthians 14:20-22 and how to relates to Isaiah 28. It seems fitting to me that Glossolalia is a fulfillment of prophesy told in Isaiah 28. As 1 Corinthians 14:22 says, tongues are a sign for unbelievers and Isaiah 28 says...
10 For it is:
Do this, do that,
a rule for this, a rule for that;
a little here, a little there.”
11 Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues
God will speak to this people,
12 to whom he said,
“This is the resting place, let the weary rest”;
and, “This is the place of repose”—
but they would not listen.
13 So then, the word of the LORD to them will become:
Do this, do that,
a rule for this, a rule for that;
a little here, a little there—
so that as they go they will fall backward;
they will be injured and snared and captured.
@GreatestGuyEver@xanga - What is a Messianic Jew?
I like the explanation of the gift of tongues in Acts when Peter was able to speak in the language of those who needed to hear. My son was able to learn fluent Portuguese in a relatively short period of time because of his faith in Christ and after having been called to Brazil by the Lord's servants.
The Holy Spirit bears witness of the Father and the Son, and of salvation through the Son. I received the Holy Spirit and felt His witness and comfort many times before I fully knew and accepted that Jesus paid for my sins. That is not salvation. Salvation is gained by enduring to the end, obeying the Lord's commandments, and following the Lord in our choices. As we repent sincerely, He forgives us, but becoming like Christ is a process, not a one-time event. I know there are some verses in the Bible inferring that there is a "saving" moment, but there are twice as many pointing to salvation as a process, line upon line and precept upon precept.
It is my witness that the Holy Spirit does come to those who truly honor the Lord today. He witnesses of the truth and leads those who will follow into greater truth. We are the spirit children of a loving Father in Heaven who desires that we become like His Son that we may become joint-heirs with Him and return to live with our Father forever. God bless you in your search for truth.
@MisteyEyez3BrokenDreamz@xanga - Simply put it's a Christian that "converts" to being Jewish, but still believes in Jesus and New Testament theology.
@GreatestGuyEver@xanga - Thank you.