Tongues

pwfaith · #1 (**permalink**) 02-06-2006, 06:48 PM

A friend and I were discussing this yesterday. I know it's a controversial issue at times, I don't want this to turn into a debate but I came across some interesting information, thought I would get some other 'opinions' on this.

Fifty Things That You Should Know About Tongues and Healing
http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/tongues.html
__________________________________________________ ____
More:

What is Speaking in Tongues?
"Speaking in tongues is prayer or praise spoken in syllables not understood by the speaker."

Words of Prayer or Praise Spoken to God: This definition indicates that speaking in tongues is primarily speech directed toward God (that is, prayer or praise). Paul says, "one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God" (1 Cor 14:2), and if there is no interpreter present at the church service, Paul says that someone who has a gift of speaking in tongues should "keep silence in church and speak to himse and to God" (1 Cor 14:28)

What kind of speech is this that is directed toward God? Pauls says, "If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful" (1 Cor 14:14, where Paul categorizes speech in tongues as praying and giving thanks, and v. 28). Therefore speaking in tongues apparently is prayer or praise directed to God, and it comes from the "spirit" of the person who is speaking. This is not inconsistent with the narrative in Acts 2, because the crowd said, "we hear them telling in our own tongues the might works of God" (Acts 2:11), a description proclaiming his might works in worship, and the crowd began to listen to this as it occurred in various languages. In fact, there is no indication that the disciples themselves were speaking to the crowd until Acts 2:14, when Peter then stands and addresses the crowd directly., presumably in Greek.

In the definition above it says "not understood by the speaker": Paul says that "one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understand him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit" (1 Cor 14:2) Now at Pentecost speech in tongues was in known languages that were understood by those who heard: "each one heard them speaking in his own language" (Acts 2:6). But once again teh speech was not understood by the speakers, for what caused the amazement was that the Galileans were speaking all these different languages (v.7). It seems, that at times speaking in tongues may involve speech in actual human languages, sometimes even languages that are understood by some of those who hear. But at other times - and Paul assumes that this will ordinarily be the case - the speech will be in a language that "no one understands" (1 Cor 14:2)

Some have objected that speaking in tongues must always consist of speech in known human languages, since that is what happened at Pentecost. But the fact that speaking in tongues occurred in known human languages once in Scripture does not require that it [i]always[I/] happen with known languages, esp. when another description of speaking in tongues (1 Cor. 14) indicates exactly the opposite. We must realize that 1 Cor. 14 is Paulâ€™s general instruction based on a wide experience of tongues-speaking in many different churches, whereas Acts 2 simply describes one unique event at a significant turning point in the history of redemption (Acts 2 is historical narrative while 1 Cor 14 is doctrinal instruction).

Speaking in tongues is not ecstatic but self-controlled. Some of the extreme elements in the Pentecostal movement have allowed frenzied and disorderly conduct at worship service, and this has, in the middle of some, perpetuated the notion that speaking in tongues is a kind of ecstatic speech. But this is not the picture given in the NT. Even when the Holy Spirit came with overwhelming power at Pentecost, the disciples were able to stop speaking in tongues so that Peter could give his sermon to the assembled crowd. More explicitly, Paul says:

If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God (1 Cor. 14:27-28)

Not All Speak in Tongues: Just as not all Christians are apostles, and not all are prophets or teachers, and not all possess gifts of healing, so not all speak with tongues. Paul clearly implies this when he asks a series of questions, all of which expect the answer "no," and includes the question "Do all speak with tongues?" (1 Cor. 12:30). The implied answer is no. Some have argued that Paul here only means that not all speak with tongues publicly, but that perhaps he would have admitted that all can speak in tongues privately. But this distinction seems foreign to the context and unconvincing. He does not specify that not all speak with tongues publicly or in church, but simply says that not all speak with tongues. His next question is, "Do all interpret?" (v.30). His previous two questions were, "Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing?" (vv. 29-30). Would we wish to make the same argument about these gifts - that not all interpret tongues publicly, but that all Christian are able to do it privately? Or that not all work miracles publicly, but that all are able to work miracles privately? Such a distinction seems unwarranted by the context in every case.

In actuality, the desire to say that every Christian can speak in tongues (even though Paul says that not all speak in tongues) is probably motivated in most cases by a prior doctrinal understanding that views baptism in the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to conversion, and sees speaking in tongues as an initial "sign" of receiving this baptism in the Holy Spirit. But there are serious questions that remain about this doctrinal position. It seems better to take 1 Cor. 12:30 to mean just what it says: not all speak in tongues. The gift of tongues - just like every other gift - is not given by the Holy Spirit to every Christian who seeks it. He "apportions to each one individually as he wills" (1 Cor. 12:11)

However, there is nothing in Scripture that says that only a few will receive the gift of speaking in tongues, and, since it is a gift Paul views as edifying and useful in prayer and worship (on a personal level even if not in church), it would not be suprising if the Holy Spirit gave a very widespread distribution of this gift and many Christian in fact received it.
Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem

matthew · #2 (**permalink**) 03-03-2006, 09:58 AM

I do plan on responding to this but i keep forgetting. Therefore i am bumping it up the list so i can asap.

God bless,

Matthew

ChickenLittle · #3 (**permalink**) 03-03-2006, 03:38 PM

I believe it is different languages. I dont believe it is anything like people use "tongues" in charasmatic churches nowadays. God isn't the author of confusion. But I know I need a translator if someone was to speak in any language other than English

matthew · #4 (**permalink**) 03-09-2006, 09:43 AM

As far as im concerned Tongues is from a gift from God and is can be one way of showing people have the Holy Spirit (but not the only way or if you dont have this gift then you dont have the Holy Spirit or neccessarily that if you can speak in tongues that you have the Holy Spirit) and God doesnt give his children anything that would harm them.

Luke 11:11-13 (NIV) "Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"

I see it as a prayer language that only God can understand and is very powerful. I also have seen many instances of Tongues being used and the result/outcome has been amazing.

God bless,

Matthew