Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrine?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

So, does speaking in tongues really hold as much of a "given" status when it comes to salvation as repentance does?

And, if - in your mind - it does, then why is it that we don't hold folks to the Book of Acts benchmark of speaking in "other" tongues as the Spirit gives utterance, rather than them speaking in an "unknown" tongue?

(Well, I'm convinced that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence that someone has received the Holy Spirit. I'm sure you've probably seen/heard the arguments used to make that case, and I dont particularly feel like going down that road right now... so I'll just leave that there. )

But anyway...Mike, as to your second question, I think you're definitely overthinking this.

Lets take it back to what Jesus said in Mk 16: "These signs shall follow them that believe....they shall speak with new tongues..."

So whether its "other" tongues, or "unknown" tongues... whether its the tongues of men or of angels, it really doesnt matter. It's still speaking in new tongues -- that is "new" at least to the person speaking.

(That's what makes it a "sign"... because the person is speaking a language that is new to him, one that he's never learned. )

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Thank you for responding.

I am going to be transparent here and just say this is very confusing to me.

No problem.

David K Bernard, deals with this topic very well in his book, The New Birth.

There's an online version available here:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...al/New-Ch9.htm

Hope that helps.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Yes sir.
If a person is praying in tongues, that is definitely a manifestation of the gift of tongues. But for someone who is being filled with the Holy Ghost....it is the gift of the Holy Spirit they are receiving, evidenced by the (initial) speaking in tongues. But not everyone who receives the gift of the Holy Spirit, even though they speak in tongues then, is receiving the gift of tongues at the same time.

To use myself as an example, I'm like millions of believers who speaks/prays in tongues at will. That is a manifestation of the gift of tongues, which we sometimes refer to our "prayer language". (In my case, this didnt come to me until a few years after I initially received the gift/baptism of the Spirit and spoke in tongues)
... But I have never given a "message" in tongues [with accompanying interpretation] as other people I know. That is also a separate manifestation of the gift. Paul addresses both of these in 1 Cor 14.

The literal translation of Mark 16 is "they shall speak in new languages" and it doesn't refer to an unknown tongue, it's referring to preaching the gospel in every tongue.

Let's address this "prayer language" because that's one that I've studied a bit more.

Here's what Paul said about praying in an unknown tongue:

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

I've heard people talk about intercession, and how that is praying with words, or groanings that can't be understood.

But, Paul seems to be saying that just praying in an unknown tongue is not fruitful, even when the spirit is praying - IF there is no interpretation.

Now, I'll grant you that there are two different instances of tongues in the Scripture, as we have already discussed: the initial sign to those gathered in Jerusalem, which we've established is "another" tongue, or known language; and the gift of tongues, which should have an interpretation.

But, nowhere do I see that anyone is encouraged to simply pray in tongues without an interpreter.

Your thoughts?

[mizpeh]

Michael,

I'll answer the question I asked you, "Did God take the gift of tongues away from me?"

No, I never had the gift of tongues. I spoke in tongues when I was initially filled with the Holy Spirit which is the evidence of tongues. The gift of tongues is different from the evidence of tongues. AFTER a believer is filled with the Spirit THEN God gives gifts according to His will. The gift of tongues is one of these gifts.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Michael,

I'll answer the question I asked you, "Did God take the gift of tongues away from me?"

No, I never had the gift of tongues. I spoke in tongues when I was initially filled with the Holy Spirit which is the evidence of tongues. The gift of tongues is different from the evidence of tongues. AFTER a believer is filled with the Spirit THEN God gives gifts according to His will. The gift of tongues is one of these gifts.

So, when you received the Holy Ghost, Miz, did you speak with an "other" tongue, i.e. a language unknown to you, but understood by someone in the congregation?

Or did you speak with an "unknown" tongue?

[DaveC519]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Yes sir.
If a person is praying in tongues, that is definitely a manifestation of the gift of tongues. But for someone who is being filled with the Holy Ghost....it is the gift of the Holy Spirit they are receiving, evidenced by the (initial) speaking in tongues. But not everyone who receives the gift of the Holy Spirit, even though they speak in tongues then, is receiving the gift of tongues at the same time.

To use myself as an example, I'm like millions of believers who speaks/prays in tongues at will. That is a manifestation of the gift of tongues, which we sometimes refer to our "prayer language". (In my case, this didnt come to me until a few years after I initially received the gift/baptism of the Spirit and spoke in tongues)
... But I have never given a "message" in tongues [with accompanying interpretation] as other people I know. That is also a separate manifestation of the gift. Paul addresses both of these in 1 Cor 14.

Hello TRFrance,

Brother, I have a question: when you are referring to "praying in tongues" (prayer language), are you referring to that activity which the believer does between himself and God, which is not broadcast to the assembly, or are you referring to a message in tongues, as in "tongues and interpretation", which is broadcast to the assembly?

If the former (private prayer), then how does this qualify as a gift of the Spirit, seeing as Paul instructed that the gifts of the Spirit were for the edifying of the entire Church (1Cor 14:12)?

[DaveC519]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Michael,

I'll answer the question I asked you, "Did God take the gift of tongues away from me?"

No, I never had the gift of tongues. I spoke in tongues when I was initially filled with the Holy Spirit which is the evidence of tongues. The gift of tongues is different from the evidence of tongues. AFTER a believer is filled with the Spirit THEN God gives gifts according to His will. The gift of tongues is one of these gifts.

Hi Mizpeh,

I believe you are correct in this.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by DaveC519

Hello TRFrance,

Brother, I have a question: when you are referring to "praying in tongues" (prayer language), are you referring to that activity which the believer does between himself and God, which is not broadcast to the assembly, or are you referring to a message in tongues, as in "tongues and interpretation", which is broadcast to the assembly?

If the former (private prayer), then how does this qualify as a gift of the Spirit, seeing as Paul instructed that the gifts of the Spirit were for the edifying of the entire Church (1Cor 14:12)?

Hi Dave,

Here's another scripture that seems to say that Paul speaks in tongues (meaning the gift of tongues) apart from the church.

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

So, when you received the Holy Ghost, Miz, did you speak with an "other" tongue, i.e. a language unknown to you, but understood by someone in the congregation?

Or did you speak with an "unknown" tongue?

Mike, I'm not sure where you find this distinction? Unknown tongue, other tongue....what's the difference?

I was in my flat in England and I was praying with a friend. I spoke in an language that I didn't know and she didn't know it either.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Mike, I'm not sure where you find this distinction? Unknown tongue, other tongue....what's the difference?

I was in my flat in England and I was praying with a friend. I spoke in an language that I didn't know and she didn't know it either.

I find the distinction in the book of Acts, Miz.

In Acts 2, the Bible specifically states that every person who was speaking in tongues was speaking in "another" tongue, and that the crowd who gathered was amazed because they heard the infilled speaking clearly in known languages:

4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

The initial sign of the infilling of the Holy Ghost was that folks who were monolingual clearly spoke in different languages to preach the gospel.

It was not the "unknown" tongue that Paul speaks of in I Corinthians 14.

So, can I safely assume that, if we are following the Book of Acts pattern, when one is filled with the Holy Ghost they should speak with a known tongue as a witness for someone who is witnessing this event who understands the language in which the infilled is speaking?