View Single Post
  #208  
Old 12-06-2008, 02:09 PM
DaveC519 DaveC519 is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 637
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin

Hi Mizpeh,

Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh View Post
I understand what you are saying BUT if the gifts are solely to edify the church then the gift of healing cannot be used upon an unbeliever in a setting apart from other members (at least one ) of the body of Christ being present.
Well, as we see in the Gospel "narrative" (D'oh!), nobody got healed, even from Jesus, without faith (Mt 13:58). Simply because Paul said that tongues were a "sign" for the unbeliever, doesn't mean the Church isn't being edified at the same time. Tongues and its accompanying interpretation do edify the Church, even if unbelievers are present in the service.

Quote:
Also the context of 1 Cor 12-14 is about the gifts of the Spirit...gifts given to those believers who have been baptized in the Spirit. You will have to go through chap 12 and 14 and clearly show how Paul differentiates tongues in prayer (tongues that edify the individual believer) and tongues in the assembly (the gift of tongues that edifies the church) as being a different. One a gift and the other a prayer language. I believe the gift of tongues comprises both.

I don't see a distinction in the tongues (that is the tongues uttered in prayer and the tongues uttered in the assembly) Paul is speaking about in Chap 14 except that if you speak in tongues in the church assembly in which the tongues are not quietly to yourself but loud enough to command everyone's attention THEN there needs to be an interpreter and if there is not an interpreter, then speak quietly in tongues to yourself and God. Where is the distinction here? It's only due to the lack of a member of the body who has the gift of interpretation of tongues.

Are you saying that person who spoke to the church in tongues without an interpreter present didn't know that it was really the prayer tongue that the Spirit was uttering and not the gift of tongues which would have been a message to the church and would have been given only if an interpreter were present? Did Paul make that distinction?
Instead of going through chapter and verse, let me offer you an over-arching principle instead:

"4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal." (1 Co 12:4-7)

With this, Paul sets the tone for his entire discourse of chapters 12-14.

What is the difference between "private tongues" and the "gift of tongues"? It is the difference and diversity of the administration and operation of the Spirit of God (see above).

For example: a person can be in the church service, praying in tongues privately unto God. This same person can also possess the gift of tongues, but this is not what we are referring to now. However, if the operation of the Spirit changes, and the direction of the Spirit leads for an opening in the service whereby tongues and interpretation will go forth, then this same person, who before was speaking in tongues privately, would now be directed to broadcast a message in tongues (perhaps even the exact same words!) to the entire assembly. This then would be followed by an interpretation, and usually in courses of two or three.

If we keep this in mind, chapter 14 comes in to closer focus and better understanding. "Personal tongues" is us (the individual) speaking unto God. The "gift of tongues" is God speaking unto us, the Church.

(did that actually answer your question?)
Reply With Quote