Disclaimer: Some postings contain other author's material. All such material is used here for fair use and discussion purposes.

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

Cessationism - Episode 8 -Tongues

Our next Episode in the cessationism series.

Additional Episodes:
Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must
  1. be from the Bible
  2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
  3. Not appeal to silence
  4. Not appeal to events or practices of history
That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
----------------

Introduction

A cessationist is a Christian who believes that the "supernatural" gifts of the Spirit, including prophecy, tongues, words of knowledge, as well as signs and wonders, did not continue after the death of the last apostle. This is contrasted with a charismatic, or perhaps, a continuationist, who is a Christian who believes the Bible's descriptions of the "supernatural" gifts of the Spirit apply to today's church and should be embraced.

Cessationists also believe that the supernatural existed largely or solely to validate the apostle's ministries, so that their teaching, eventually contained in the NT, would be attested to. With the completed canon of the Bible, there would no longer be a need for these supernatural validations, and thus these things ceased. The reason, they say, is that since signs and wonders had the sole purpose of validating the ministries of the apostles, they are no longer needed because the apostles are gone and we have the completed Bible.

From this they conclude that the Bible is the complete and final revelation of God, and thus He speaks only through the Scriptures today.

Part of the reason they make this claim is if they can restrict the supernatural only to the apostle's ministry, they can invalidate the idea that the supernatural persists to present day.

This series will examine these and other claims.

Tongues, an Issue With Baggage

We should mention at the onset that we have no dog in this fight, having considered Tongues to be a secondary issue and not key to understanding or believing the Gospel. Nor are Tongues particularly relevant to the ongoing Christian walk. So we haven't found a need to make a case for Tongues in the past. But now we are pressed to mount our defense of Tongues as a contemporary spiritual gift because the dispute has been brought to us, both by errant charismatics and errant cessationists. 

Having considered some of the many critiques of the gift of Tongues, we quickly realized that the issue of Tongues, as well as interpretation, seems to be a sticking point with both cessationists and charismatics alike, mostly due to misunderstanding and bad teaching. We suspect the problem with tongues is more about cessationists having an issue with the excesses of contemporary charismatics than it is about what the Bible teaches. Though cessationists do try to make a sort of biblical case, the stories of charismatics bouncing off the walls is actually enough for them. 

This is somewhat saddening to us, since this makes behavior an obstacle to biblical truth. However, a thoughtful Bible student would make the Bible, not peoples' behavior, the source of doctrine. Therefore, we shall consider only the biblical case.

We also need to understand that all the spiritual gifts (pneumatikos charismata) are supernatural endowments of the Holy Spirit. All spiritual gifts are supernatural. We cannot diminish certain gifts because we view them as more rudimentary or practical. Nor can we elevate others to a special category because of their spectacular nature.

Two Kinds of Tongues

The first fundamental error Christians commit when examining Tongues is that all Tongues in the Bible are the same thing. This leads to a basic misunderstanding of the purpose of the biblical accounts of Tongues. As we studied the issue we were surprised at how the truth leapt out of the pages of Scripture: There are two expressions of Tongues, and they serve very different purposes.

In Acts,
  • they were real languages not needing interpretation. 
  • they did not occur in the church.
  • they were not identified as a gift. 
  • they were specific events with the specific purpose, a sign to the apostles about the gentiles.
  • the issue was not Tongues at all, it was about the Holy Spirit.
In First Corinthians,
  • Tongues must be interpreted to be understood.
  • Tongues operate in the gathering of the saints. 
  • Tongues is a spiritual gift.
  • Tongues is spoken mysteries.
  • Tongues is a sign for unbelievers.
The two manifestations of Tongues are substantially different. Based on this premise, we would like to suggest there are two obvious categories, Tongues as a sign (Acts), and Tongues as a spiritual gift (1 Corinthians). 

And we would like to reiterate, the issue of Tongues is not about Tongues at all, it is actually about the Holy Spirit.

Some would disagree there are two types of Tongues, so we will now make our case.

1) Tongues as a Sign

The Tongues of the book of Acts were always in languages known to the hearers. We infer this because there is no mention of interpretation in any of the accounts. 

The first occurrence is Acts 2:3-4:
They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 
This was the event now known as Pentecost, the inaugural outpouring of the Holy Spirit. A large crowd heard what was happening and wondered what this remarkable commotion was about. Many nations were gathered, and they all heard the glories of God in their own language, so there could have been dozens or even hundreds of languages being spoken. 

There were a limited number of people in the upper room. Yet many, many, many people heard in their own language. This is how the event was described:
Ac. 2:5-8 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?"
Notice that this was from the perspective of the hearers. Each one heard in their own language. There were many languages spoken at Pentecost, not needing interpretation. This Tongues was expressed in natural human languages the hearers understood.

As we continue reading the account, we find the crowd wondering what this meant. Ac. 2:12-21:
12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?” 13 Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine.” 14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.15 These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning!
Peter's answer is earth-shaking:
16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy. 19 I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and billows of smoke. 20 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. 21 And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." [Joel 2:28-32]
Peter asserted that this event was validated by a prophecy spoken by Joel hundreds of years before, and he quoted the prophecy to begin his discourse. Pentecost was a fulfillment of this prophecy. Specifically, salvation was for the nations, not just Israel, and that the Holy Spirit is no longer limited to a small number of prophets in Israel:
Ac. 2:39 "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off — for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
It's interesting that on one hand Peter noted the pouring of of the Holy Spirit on all people, yet on the other hand did not really understand the connection of the full spiritual impact to the gentiles. Despite his quoting of the prophet Joel, he subsequently had a vision with a sheet descending from heaven which showed him that he should not call gentiles unclean. But even that wasn't sufficient for him, for Paul wrote in Galatians chapter 2 that he opposed Peter to his face for his hypocrisy towards the gentiles. 

Peter was a slow learner. In fact, we believe that all the apostles had a hard time with this issue, and that the various incidents in Acts were all designed to show the Jews generally and the apostles specifically that salvation and the fullness of the Holy Spirit had come to the gentiles, not just the Jews. This was an incredibly important lesson, and a very difficult one.

From Jews to Gentiles

The first Tongues were spoken by Jews, but every subsequent Tongues recorded in Acts was uttered by gentiles. Acts describes three particular encounters between the apostles and gentiles. And all of the encounters were regarding receiving the Holy Spirit. Remember, we said that the Holy Spirit is the important factor. This is important because there is a progression at work here. Each one amplified and expanded what had happened before. Acts 8:15, Holy Spirit but no Tongues; Acts 10:44, Holy Spirit with Tongues; Acts 19:6, Holy Spirit with both Tongues and prophecy. 

In each case, the apostles were surprised, even shocked. They had spoken in Tongues at Pentecost, but now gentiles were speaking in Tongues and even prophesying! A new covenant had arrived, where God's purpose was farther reaching than they could have accepted or even imagined, even though their Scriptures plainly spoke of it: I will pour out my Spirit on all people.

It seems clear that the purpose of Tongues in Acts was not to prove the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but rather, to authenticate God's grand intention to the Apostles. God wanted them to understand His purpose regarding the nations, who now have access to salvation and the Holy Spirit as well. 

The Tongues in Acts, then, were primarily a sign to the Apostles, who were Jews.

Let's take a closer look at the three times in Acts when the Holy Spirit filled the gentiles.

Acts 8:15-17
When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
This is the first account of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the gentiles. Philip had gone down to a Samarian city to preach the Gospel. He performed some miracles and cast out demons as he preached, and many believed and were baptized (Ac. 8:12). 

Word of this revival got back to the apostles, who sent Peter and John down to see what was going on. This is our first clue that the apostles didn't understand. It is significant that Peter and John were sent from Jerusalem. We suspect that the apostles couldn't believe it. The gentiles were being saved? Samaritans? Was that possible? They had to check it out. 

Interestingly, though the Samaritans had believed and were baptized they had not received the Holy Spirit (Ac. 8:16). Peter and John laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit (Ac. 8:17). No Tongues is mentioned here, only the Holy Spirit. We think this is important, because we believe that Tongues is not required as evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We will discuss the below, and we will go into more detail regarding this in Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.

Peter and John confirmed that these gentiles had been saved but had not received the Holy Spirit. This is also significant. We think God had specifically delayed the Holy Spirit so that Peter and Paul would witness what God was doing. 

Peter plays a substantial role in this whole scenario. We find him next mentioned in Acts 9:32 where we find he has been traveling all over the country. However, he apparently restricted his travel to Jewish cities like Lydda, Sharon, and Joppa. It was in Joppa that Peter would have his vision of a sheet descending from heaven. After this some men came from Cornelius, a gentile, to fetch Peter (Ac. 10:20).

In violation of Hebrew law Peter went to this gentile's house and began to preach. Peter understood the meaning of the vision he had, for it was the first thing he mentioned:
Ac. 10:34-35 Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35 but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right. 
This brings us to the next passage.

Acts 10:44-47
While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”
The Jewish believers were shocked. The gentiles have received the Holy Spirit just as we have. They could hardly believe a gentile could receive the Holy Spirit. The exact same thing that happened to the Apostles happened to gentiles (...just as we have.). The exact same Holy Spirit. Not a different Holy Spirit. They were starting to realize that the move of God and receiving the Holy Spirit is for all, not just the Jews.

The next occurrence indicates the disciples were wising up to this, because Paul asked if they had received the Holy Spirit. 

Acts 19:1-7
While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied. 4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. 7 There were about twelve men in all.
Not only did they speak in Tongues, they now prophesied. Interesting. More than Tongues, now prophecy as well. The gentiles were speaking the actual prophetic Word of the God of Israel. This must have been mind-blowing to the Apostles.

It's important to note that Paul did not place his hands on them for them to receive Tongues, he did it so that they would receive the Holy Spirit. Paul was clearly connecting Tongues, and now prophecy, to the fact that gentiles receive salvation and the Holy Spirit too. In other words, these gentiles all received the very same Holy Spirit, and the proof provided for the apostles' benefit was Tongues and prophecy.

This is the last mention of Tongues in Acts. All these manifestations were connected to the idea that the Holy Spirit is available to all believers, gentile and Jew, and it was necessary for each person receive the Holy Spirit to be saved. 

But this actually has nothing at all to do with the spiritual gift.

2) Tongues as a Spiritual Gift

As we just learned, the Tongues in Acts went to the gentiles, to serve as one of the identifiers to the Apostles that the gentiles received the Holy Spirit too. However, Tongues in 1 Corinthians were inside the body of believers as part of the gatherings. The purpose of Tongues here was not to demonstrate salvation has come to the gentiles, but primarily for the ministry to the saints and also as a sign to unbelievers.

2a) Tongues in the Church

Let's review the Scriptures regarding the Spiritual gift of Tongues.

Paul set forth order and context for the gifts to operate in the church:
1Co. 13:1-3 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
It's not enough to have the gifts. We have to have them operate in love. They are meaningless, as hollow and empty as a clanging cymbal if we don't have love.

But something else is interesting here. What is the Tongues of angels? We have seen up to this point that Tongues was real human languages. But now we learn of the possibility of the Tongues of angels. 

Cessationists believe that Paul was engaging in hyperbole, that he was exaggerating for the sake of contrasting the gifts operating with and without love. But we don't agree. We believe Tongues of angels is an apt description. We believe the Tongues of angels is real. Here's why. Paul wrote, 
1Co. 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no-one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
The spiritual gift of Tongues is speaking to God. No one understands. No one means no one. If no one understands, it cannot be human languages. If anyone understands, it is outside the category Paul defined. Logically, that only leaves a non-human language. In addition, if Tongues is solely human languages as cessationists believe, why would Paul write that the Tongues-speaker does not speak to men but to God? And if he's speaking to God, wouldn't that be a private expression outside the boundaries of human language?

"He utters mysteries with his spirit." "Mystery" is mustérion, which is a mystery, secret, of which initiation is necessary; in the NT: the counsels of God, once hidden but now revealed in the Gospel or some fact thereof; the Christian revelation generally; particular truths or details of the Christian revelation. Thus Tongues definitionally contain divine information.

This is not a human language in need of translation. Tongues need interpretation for the mystery to be communicated and understood (we discuss interpretation below). This is a total departure from the manifestation of Tongues we read about in Acts.

2Co. 12:2-4:
I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know — God knows. 3 And I know that this man — whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows — 4 was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell.
"Inexpressible" is árrhētos; properly, can not be spoken; unutterable because beyond description.

Paul went to the third heaven and saw and heard unimaginable things, including words that were beyond description. What was he hearing? It is doubtful he was hearing inexpressible human languages in heaven. We would suggest it is possible that he heard the Tongues of angels.

1Co. 12:10:
...to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.
Notice that Paul does not write ...to another speaking in tongues..., he says ...to another speaking in different kinds of tongues... 

Why would Paul write different kinds of Tongues [heterō genē], and not simply different Tongues? The Greek reads, allō de prophēteia allō de diakriseis pneumatōn heterō genē glōssōn allō de hermēneia glōssōn, which literally is, "and to another, prophecy, and to another, distinguishing spirits, and to another, different kinds of languages, and to another, interpretation of a language..."

The word heterō ("different") appears uniquely for Tongues. Paul modifies "kinds of Tongues" into "different kinds of Tongues." He essentially says, "a variety of a variety of language." Therefore, Paul intentionally characterized Tongues as being not only a variety of languages, but a variety of variety.

This might seem redundant, but actually, we believe this phrasing takes us out of the realm of human language. This is because this Tongues "no one" understands. There is more than one kind of tongue. That is, there are different kinds of different kinds.

We also find the Greek word genē ("kinds"), which means offspring, family, race, nation, kind. It typically refers to lineage, the nation from which one comes or belongs to. We find the same word used in 1Pe. 2:9, translated "people:"
But you are a chosen people ["genē"], a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people ["genē"] belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.
So "different kinds" (heterō genē) of tongues means tongues that are various in nature. We as Christians are a kind of a kind, a subset of humans, not based on earthy genetics. We are a race of spiritual men, not of this world.

We would therefore suggest that if the word "kind" can be used for a non-earthly kind of people, then the word can be used for a non-earthly kind of language.

2b) Tongues as Part of the Ministry of the Body

Now we shall consider how Tongues manifest in the gathering of the saints:
1Co. 12:7-11 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.
Paul described how the body needs to work together in all the gifts. He told us that these are necessary things for the body to work properly. The Holy Spirit is the one who determines who gets what gifts.
1Co. 12:28-31 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28 And 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. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But eagerly desire the greater gifts.
Not all people have all the gifts. Everyone has some gift. Paul was plainly teaching the fact that some do not have some gifts. This is contrary to the charismatic "baptized by the Holy Spirit as evidenced by speaking in Tongues," which we discuss below.

Interestingly, there is a hierarchy of gifts. Some are greater than others. The greater gifts are those which edify others. This means that a person who does not have a particular spiritual gift can seek it out (31 But eagerly desire the greater gifts). In other words, the Holy Spirit is responsive to us when we seek His work in our lives, in particular, greater gifts like prophecy. We can ask, seek, and knock for more of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 11:13), which would include His gifts (Mt. 7:11). The primary reason is so we can minister more effectively in the body.

2c) Interpretation

It's important to note that Tongues in the Corinthian church required interpretation. The Tongue speaker is speaking mysteries to God, not real languages to men:
1Co. 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no-one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. 
Previously, in Acts everyone heard in their own language the glories of God. No interpretation was required. But now interpretation is needed.
1Co. 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 
Interpretation is different than translation. Strong's says "interpretation" in this verse is the Greek word herméneia, an interpretation, giving the gist of a message rather than a strict translation; an equivalent meaning, rather than a "word-for-word" rendering. 

However, "translate" is a completely different Greek word, metherméneuó, which is, I translate (from one language into another).

Interpretation requires a person with the supernatural gift of interpretation, not a natural understanding of a human language. Tongues is a supernatural, prophetic language in operation in the church setting, accompanied by a supernatural, prophetic gift of interpretation.

1 Cor. 14:28 refers to the interpreter as dierméneutés, which means an explainer, an interpreter.
1Co. 14:28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.  
The gift of interpretation is to explain and expound what the Tongues speaker said, not to translate it. Translating human language involves no explaining or expounding.

It's an important distinction. Translators do not explain, they simply translate. Interpreters expound. A related Greek word, dierméneuó (thoroughly interpret, accurately [fully] explain) is found in Luke 24:27, translated "explained:"
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Obviously Jesus was not translating, He was interpreting the words of Scripture that were previously not understood by His hearers. He's explaining mysteries, making sense out of the things that were hidden.

2d) Is. 28:10-12 - Why Tongues?

Why does God even bother with Tongues? Really, it's a very odd thing, and doesn't really make sense to the casual reader. Perhaps this is because many Christians are simply uninterested in the sometimes deep dives required to truly understand the Bible.

Isaiah 28:10-12 is an example. This is an interesting passage, which Paul provided as a proof text to bolster his case regarding Tongues:
1Co. 14:21 In the Law it is written: “Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me,”  says the Lord.
Let's quote a larger part of the reference Paul makes, Isaiah 28:10-12:
10 For it is: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; [Hebrew: sav lasav sav lasav kav lakav kav lakav (possibly meaningless sounds; perhaps a mimicking of the prophet’s words), also in verse 13] 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.
Very few people seem to want to take the time to look up and read these OT texts. This is a shame, because often times much error could be avoided by simply reading the referenced texts.

The Hebrew for with foreign lips and strange tongues reads as follows: ū·ḇə·lā·šō·wn śā·p̄āh bə·la·‘ă·ḡê  (direct translation: "and tongue lips with stammering").

That last word is interesting, bə·la·‘ă·ḡê. It means jesters, stammering. 

When we read the context of Isaiah 28 we find that judgment was coming upon Israel by God making their prophets speak like drunks (vs.7), a gibberish message. Since His prophets will speak nonsense, so also from the mouths of the gentiles will the prophetic word come (vs. 11) as a testimony against Israel. That is, the salvation and Holy Spirit filling of the gentiles (including Tongues) is judgment against the Jews.

Let's try to wrap our minds around this. Isaiah wrote a prophecy that included sentences of nonsense words. God essentially turns this on its head, telling us that He will use these nonsense words (jesters, stammering) to speak to this people (Israel). 

Amazingly, after Paul quoted Isaiah's prophecy he applied it with the very same conclusion:
Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers. 1Co. 14:22 
Notice Paul used the word "sign" (sémeion). which means a sign, miracle, indication, mark, token. Tongues is not a simply a human language, but a miracle, an indicator.

We must conclude that the gift of Tongues is necessarily "nonsense" to the natural ear, but full of prophetic meaning, requiring interpretation.

Baptism of the Holy Spirit as evidenced by speaking in Tongues?

Contrary to the beliefs of many Pentecostals and charismatics, the gift of Tongues is not evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We repeat: the gift of Tongues is not evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The reader may have discerned this from what we've already presented, but let's examine it in more detail.

This doctrine is derived from a misunderstanding of the Tongues of Acts. As we noted above, these Tongues was a sign of the gift of the Holy Spirit, not to the believer, but to the apostles. Therefore, the Tongues of Acts has nothing to do with evidence of being baptized with the Spirit. Unless of course there are apostles present in our congregations today who need to be shown that the Holy Spirit is not just for the Jews!

So we must turn to 1 Corinthians to derive our doctrine of Tongues as a gift operating in the gathering of the saints. And here there is no mention of a second experience that is proved by Tongues. Nowhere in 1 Corinthians is the pouring out of the Holy Spirit connected with Tongues. In fact, there is no Bible verse at all that tells us that the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the gift of Tongues. It's just not there.

We must make a careful distinction between being filled with the Spirit and being baptized by the Spirit (This is discussed in more depth in Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit). 

First, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the saving event:

Ga. 3:27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 

1Co. 12:13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body — whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free — and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is the born-again moment, when each of us were made alive. There can be no new birth without the Holy Spirit: 
Jn. 3:6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.
Second, it is our considered opinion that charismatics are actually talking about being filled with the Spirit. In effect, it is partly a semantics problem. Everyone receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit when they are saved, but there is no guarantee that Christians are or remained filled with the Holy Spirit.

Peter was already saved, but he received a subsequent filling of the Holy Spirit:

Ac. 4:8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them...

The believers were all filled with the Holy Spirit:

Ac. 4:31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

This is the Biblical model. Salvation is the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and being filled with the Holy Spirit is sought out and supernaturally delivered as a subsequent move of God in a Christian's life.

Why are we reacting so strongly against the charismatic belief? Because of the dismay of those who do not receive the gift of Tongues. The charismatic teaching means that they have not received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and that their faith is inadequate. In effect, they are substandard Christians.

But Paul himself denies that every believer can or should have Tongues. As part of a long discourse about the Body and its various parts, Paul wrote:
1Co. 12:7-11 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.
We can clearly see that there is a different manifestation of the the Spirit given to each person, just as He desires. The Holy Spirit distributes Himself in a unique way to each believer.

Later in the chapter, Paul proceeds to ask a series of rhetorical questions, all with the implied answer, "no."
1Co. 12:27-30 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28 And 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. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
The distribution of the gifts is a work of the Holy Spirit. We therefore conclude that not all Christians must speak in Tongues. The charismatic "baptism of the Holy Spirit as evidenced by speaking in Tongues" is deemed a faulty understanding. 

Again we refer the reader to our presentation regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Objection: Tongues are only human languages

The primary assertion of Cessationists is that all Tongues is known human languages and there is no other expressions of Tongues:
There is nothing in Scripture that states or implies that speaking in tongues is an individual or private prayer language. Biblical tongues were actual human languages that could be understood by others, not arbitrary sounds and syllables spouted off during an emotional high which no one can understand.
We believe this is a mistake. Why would we say that? Strong's Exhaustive Concordance tells us that Tongues were not solely known human languages. Tongues is glóssa:
...1 Corinthians 14:7 ff, is the gift of men who, rapt in an ecstasy and no longer quite masters of their own reason and consciousness, pour forth their glowing spiritual emotions in strange utterances, rugged, dark, disconnected, quite unfitted to instruct or to influence the minds of others...
We wonder how Strong's could define the word this way, yet those who oppose Tongues would go so far as to force a completely specious definition on it. Tongues is not merely human languages spoken by a person unfamiliar with those languages. There is clearly a supernatural element to tongues that is not a product of human reason. 

Paul makes an interesting contrast between prophecy and Tongues, explaining that it is better to speak understandable words rather than Tongues:
1Co. 14:19 But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. 
"Intelligible" is nooce, the intellective faculty, the understanding... opposed to τό πνεῦμα, the spirit intensely roused and completely absorbed with divine things, but destitute of clear ideas of them...

So, if Tongues is limited to real languages, why did Paul assert these words would not be available to the intellective faculty? When Paul referred to intelligible words, he's talking about words that can be naturally understood. That is, "intelligible" is actual human language. He would rather speak in intelligible human language than in unintelligible Tongues. 

Paul cements this idea that Tongues cannot be intellectually understood:
1Co. 14:23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand, or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?
Some who do not understand is idiótés, which means destitute of the "gift of tongues..."  This is critical. Again Strong's Exhaustive Concordance betrays the cessationists. If the Tongues in 1 Corinthians were real languages, why would Paul describe those who don't understand with a word that means "destitute of the gift of tongues?" 

Thus it is clear that if someone doesn't understand the Tongue it is because the person is attempting to do so with natural understanding. The lack of understanding of a Tongue is a spiritual condition whereby the hearer cannot comprehend what is being said (idiótés); i.e. he does not have the gift of interpretation.

This would also mean that if tongues must always be natural languages, outsiders, including foreigners, would obviously be able to understand what was being spoken. The language would be their language and not require any gift of interpretation. They would not be idiótés, for they would simply be speakers of another language. 

Natural languages would be translated, if there was a need for such. However, the gift of interpretation is a supernatural gift used to interpret a supernatural language. Interpretation is not translation. 

This should immediately clear up any misconception as to what Paul was saying. Paul was contrasting the natural mind and natural understanding, with the spiritual expression that is the gift of Tongues, which no one can understand apart from the supernatural gift of interpretation:
1Co. 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no-one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
Objection: Prayers must be rational

Must prayers always be "rational" and "intelligent?" We discuss subjectivity in Episode 16, Is prophecy subjective?

1 Corinthians 14 begins with
Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no-one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
In other words, Paul was pointing out a something about speaking in Tongues that is lacking when compared with prophecy. He simply notes that prophesying is better because it edifies others.

Paul continues to contrast the two, making a conclusion in verse 14 with the same concept he opened with: So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. He did not forbid praying in Tongues(1Co. 14:39), he simply pointed out it is better to build up the church.

At this point, Paul introduced the word "pray" when he refers to Tongues, and by inference, to prophecy. So he was suggesting that both Tongues and prophecy are connected to prayer. One builds up the individual, the other the Body. But nowhere do we see Paul say that a person must do both at the same time. Indeed, Paul notes later in verse 26 that "...when you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church." 

So Paul's point is that everyone has a contribution to the body, manifesting in a variety of ways. 

Jumping over to Ephesians, we see Paul commanding prayer [6:18]: "And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests." That is, praying in the Spirit is the way to pray, which might or might not be with Tongues, but certainly according to the power of the Holy Spirit.

Based on all of this, we conclude that the gift of Tongues in the gathering of the saints does not have to be rational, or restricted to earthly languages, and is probably not.

Tongues Will Cease

We do agree with cessationists that Tongues, Knowledge, and Prophecy will cease (1Co. 13:8). It's a matter of when. The need for these things will go away once something happens, the "perfect" (1Co. 13:10). We discuss the "perfect" in Episode 1, The Perfect, so we shall not repeat ourselves except to say that the "perfect" is the arrival of a time when we will no longer see through the glass darkly (1Co. 13:12). At that point we will no longer need the imperfect ways of Tongues, prophecy, and knowledge.

Why the Gifts if They had the Apostles?

Despite the insistence of cessationists that these gifts ceased after the death of the last apostle, we can't help but notice that Tongues and prophecy, as well as other "supernatural" spiritual gifts, were going full-bore in the early church. This the same early church that had the Apostles and prophets among them, yet there were still these "supernatural" gifts widely distributed and practiced (He. 2:4).

Indeed, Paul was correcting and instructing the Corinthian church about these things, so of course he as an apostle was still on the scene. Why would Paul bother teaching about the gift of Tongues to edify and encourage (with interpretation) if the very Word was coming out of the Apostles' mouths? Why would a any prophecy or a Tongue be needed? A first century church-goer could just directly ask an apostle about some mystery or spiritual truth. Or read the letters the apostles sent out.

And why would Paul go into such detail explaining them if they were to pass away in a few years? Obviously, because Paul did not expect that these gifts would cease, so the church needed instruction regarding their proper use.

Conclusion

We have discovered that the Tongues in Acts were different than the Tongues as expressed in the Body. One kind required no interpretation, because they were a sign for the apostle's benefit. The other kind needs to be interpreted (not translated) in order to edify the body; otherwise, they only edify the person speaking them. But even that is acceptable, just not as desirable.

We also discovered that Tongues in the Body is possibly the language of angels. They need not be human languages.

In any case, there is no indication that these gifts should not be expressed today. Paul says they are desirable, and we need to agree with Paul.
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)