Acts 2: Then and Now

[faithit166]

years ago a sister in christ an i went to another sisters house being there just a short time her husband pulled up in the drive it was noon time the sister said brother hatch is home this was unusual he walks in the front door drops his head tongues come forth ,then the interpretation proceeds the lord said 'you have lost your first love,satan is trying to take you to another place i am the only one that can bring you into my kingdom,within a week or so i was out of church and was out about 10 years just wanted to share

[Godsdrummer]

All of this strikes me funny, as we get so wrapped up with the thought tongues that we go back and forth forgeting it seems that the instructions of Paul seem to be ingnored.
1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

Love is to be the primary expresion of the Christian, after that we are to seek spiritual gifts, ie word of wisdom, healing, word of knowledge, etc. But twice in Pauls teaching in these chapters he says to seek to prophecy.

1Co 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.

The only times that tongues are given any directive is on the day of Pentecost where they were speaking "the wonderful works of God", at the house of Cornelious where it seems it was given as a sign that the Gentiles has been given the same spirit out pouring that was given to the Jews. And at the baptism of the diciples of John.

To further point things out, OT prophecy has little enphisis on tongues as it does dreams, visions, and prophecy. Of which we see little of in most Pentecostal circles. Pentecostals seem to put too much inphisis of tongues.

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Again in Pentecostal circles we don't have a clue as to the ministry of prophecy, I speek this from experiance having been in attendance of a group that has the gift of prophecy along with other gifts of the spirit at work in their midst. I have also been a recipient to direct prophecy spoken to me. It changed my life in an instant, ever bit as life changing as when I received the HG. I only say this because it has be the catilist that has changed my understanding and view of the gifts of the spirit and move of God.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

All of this strikes me funny, as we get so wrapped up with the thought tongues that we go back and forth forgeting it seems that the instructions of Paul seem to be ingnored.
1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

Love is to be the primary expresion of the Christian, after that we are to seek spiritual gifts, ie word of wisdom, healing, word of knowledge, etc. But twice in Pauls teaching in these chapters he says to seek to prophecy.

1Co 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.

The only times that tongues are given any directive is on the day of Pentecost where they were speaking "the wonderful works of God", at the house of Cornelious where it seems it was given as a sign that the Gentiles has been given the same spirit out pouring that was given to the Jews. And at the baptism of the diciples of John.

To further point things out, OT prophecy has little enphisis on tongues as it does dreams, visions, and prophecy. Of which we see little of in most Pentecostal circles. Pentecostals seem to put too much inphisis of tongues.

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

Again in Pentecostal circles we don't have a clue as to the ministry of prophecy, I speek this from experiance having been in attendance of a group that has the gift of prophecy along with other gifts of the spirit at work in their midst. I have also been a recipient to direct prophecy spoken to me. It changed my life in an instant, ever bit as life changing as when I received the HG. I only say this because it has be the catilist that has changed my understanding and view of the gifts of the spirit and move of God.

The problem is by Emphasis you are referring to tongues as evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism. However Pentecostal doctrine teaches the tongues in that case and the gift of tongues for church edification are not the same.

So in my experience we don't emphasize one gift over the other doctrinally. Tongues and interpretation is the most common "visible" gift. For one reason it's loud and done in the middle of a congregation

Other gifts might be more discreet. I have had "Words of knowledge" happen often but I did not blurt it out for everyone to hear, particularly since it involved a single individual

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The problem is by Emphasis you are referring to tongues as evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism. However Pentecostal doctrine teaches the tongues in that case and the gift of tongues for church edification are not the same.

So in my experience we don't emphasize one gift over the other doctrinally. Tongues and interpretation is the most common "visible" gift. For one reason it's loud and done in the middle of a congregation

Other gifts might be more discreet. I have had "Words of knowledge" happen often but I did not blurt it out for everyone to hear, particularly since it involved a single individual

Exactly, Paul says to seek after prophecy and that he would rather we prophecied. Tongues as a gift in my opinion, is the ability to speak other languages to people of other languages. Why else would Paul say, "I would rather you prophecied unless one interpretes", This is not a spiritual interpertation, again in my opinion, rather acctualy interpreting the tongue as was done on the day of Pentecost. And yes when we speak in tongues it is just a continuation of our praise, spoken from our heart. "they heard them speak the wonderful works of God" Nowhere does Paul list interpretation as a gift of the spirit. Hence the tongues Paul speaks of in chapter 13, is not the gift of tongues as we suppose rather the abililty to speak several languages of men.

If you will read the whole chapter of 14 you will see Paul never addresses the term "tongues and interpretation" , He addresses tongues and then an interpreter. Paul further does not give any directive as to the message that would come from a inerpretation of tongues as he does prophecy, wonder why that is? Could it be that when we speak in tongues it is nothing more than a continuation of our praise to God in a unknown tongue. To those around us we are just bableing, but to God it is speaking praise to him in a nother language. After all tongues are only a sign to those that beleive not, it is to mean little or nothing to those that believe. verse 22

as for the gift of word of knowledge, or wisdom? these are most often personal undestandings that are not to be used in public as you said, as it usualy involves an idividual. I have heard of so called preacher, that were called prophets that would call people out and tell them thier sin in front of whole congregations. First if this happened they were not prophets!!! and I feel that they were not in the right using a word of knowledge or word of wisdom in that manner. Maybe that is why we don't hear of that kind of ministry much.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The problem is by Emphasis you are referring to tongues as evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism. However Pentecostal doctrine teaches the tongues in that case and the gift of tongues for church edification are not the same.

So in my experience we don't emphasize one gift over the other doctrinally. Tongues and interpretation is the most common "visible" gift. For one reason it's loud and done in the middle of a congregation

Other gifts might be more discreet. I have had "Words of knowledge" happen often but I did not blurt it out for everyone to hear, particularly since it involved a single individual

Praxeas
I just realized as I reread my post, you make a profound statement. "Pentecostal doctrine teaches" This is the problem with to many Christians, this is thier answer to many bible questions, they fall back on the teaching of the organization they attend. "that is what my church teaches" when I was in high school I would take a note to get excused from dancing and swimming as we taught against those things. When ask why I did not dance, or swim with the girls. My answer was "it is against my religion".

The whole reason for this because I see it in many responses posted on AFF, they are speaking only what they have been taught not what the bible truly says. The meaning of verses change when taken out of context, even as much as not taking into concideration the chapter before and after as in I Cor. 13. For myself I have found when I step back and clear my mind of all my original teachings then read the passage many times the true meaning comes forth in glaring light.

Some times we need to look beyond the "Pentecostal doctrine" as it is just as much a man made doctrine as any other. Although it is a good foundation most times.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Praxeas
I just realized as I reread my post, you make a profound statement. "Pentecostal doctrine teaches" This is the problem with to many Christians, this is thier answer to many bible questions, they fall back on the teaching of the organization they attend. "that is what my church teaches" when I was in high school I would take a note to get excused from dancing and swimming as we taught against those things. When ask why I did not dance, or swim with the girls. My answer was "it is against my religion".

The whole reason for this because I see it in many responses posted on AFF, they are speaking only what they have been taught not what the bible truly says. The meaning of verses change when taken out of context, even as much as not taking into concideration the chapter before and after as in I Cor. 13. For myself I have found when I step back and clear my mind of all my original teachings then read the passage many times the true meaning comes forth in glaring light.

Some times we need to look beyond the "Pentecostal doctrine" as it is just as much a man made doctrine as any other. Although it is a good foundation most times.

That's not what Im doing. Im pointing out that many criticisms, while they may be valid under normal circumstances, end up being strawman arguments because they don't take into consideration the doctrinal views of that group

That being said the proper criticism would be that doctrinal position on tongues being different from Acts to the gift of tongues in 1cor

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That's not what Im doing. Im pointing out that many criticisms, while they may be valid under normal circumstances, end up being strawman arguments because they don't take into consideration the doctrinal views of that group

That being said the proper criticism would be that doctrinal position on tongues being different from Acts to the gift of tongues in 1cor

I used to see things that way and have not been pursuaded one way or the other as of yet through my study. I can see that tongues as one of the gifts of the spirit and many times the first gift realized, as on the day of Pentecost. So part of the reason for this discustion from my point of view is to see if one way can be refuted over the other.

As you see none of this is personal for me I argue views to see how they stand many times.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I used to see things that way and have not been pursuaded one way or the other as of yet through my study. I can see that tongues as one of the gifts of the spirit and many times the first gift realized, as on the day of Pentecost. So part of the reason for this discustion from my point of view is to see if one way can be refuted over the other.

As you see none of this is personal for me I argue views to see how they stand many times.

There seems to be an obvious distinction. However perhaps part of this is experiential.

By that I mean many Pentecostals can speak in tongues but somehow we all notice the difference when someone begins to give that "message in tongues" in a church service. We somehow all notice it. Why? I don't know.

And I have given a "message in tongues" and even personally it felt different than when I normally speak in tongues. Why? I don't know

But I do no there are some differences in the bible as far as setting.

In acts, there was never an instance of someone interpreting.

It was never a regular church meeting. It was always someone receiving the Spirit for the first time. In all but one it was actually an evangelical situation of preaching Jesus to an unsaved person or group

In acts 2 from 12 to 120 were possibly all speaking in tongues whereas Paul rebukes that sort of performance in a church meeting saying at the very most 2 or 3 and then let one interpret.

Same with the 12 disciples of John and who knows how many of Cornelius's household there was

When Paul said "Do all speak with tongues?" I thought that was rather odd considering he was trying to tell a church to limit the number of tongue speaking and that he would the all spoke with tongues.

Could it be he meant, do all have this ability to speak in a tongue, to be interpreted for church edification? Why do I say that? Because Paul indicated that while there is one Gift of tongues there are many operations

1Co 12:6 And there are differences of workings, but it is the same God working all things in all.

and to another kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues.

It may be just as there are different kinds of languages, there are different functions or operations of the gift of tongues.

Clearly in Acts they spoke in a language that needed not to be interpreted. It was for the hearers of the unbelievers not the church to be edified.

Yet the tongue Paul speaks of no man understands but God. And no body is edified but the speaker unless someone interprets

BTW the word Interpret can mean "translate", but it also means "explains" such as when Jesus or Philip explained what the scriptures meant, though the readers could clearly read what it said, they needed someone to explain it. That's not the same as translate

He that speaks in tongues speaks mysteries...that does not mean "He that speaks in tongues speaks a language that others don't know"

Here is the word
mustḗrion; gen. mustēríou, neut. noun from mústēs (n.f.), a person initiated into sacred mysteries, which is from muéō (G3453), to initiate, learn a secret. A secret, or esoteric knowledge

(I) Denotes in general something hidden or not fully manifest. 2Th_2:7 speaks of "the mystery of iniquity" which began to work in secret and was not then completely disclosed or manifested.
(II) Some sacred thing hidden or secret which is naturally unknown to human reason and is only known by the revelation of God (Rom_11:25; 1Co_4:1; 1Co_14:2; 1Co_15:51; Col_2:2; 1Ti_3:16; see 1Co_2:7).

I never realized this before but that is quite possibly an argument for a "heavenly language"...a hidden or mystery language..that's why nobody understands that language.

Hmmmmmm

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

There seems to be an obvious distinction. However perhaps part of this is experiential.

By that I mean many Pentecostals can speak in tongues but somehow we all notice the difference when someone begins to give that "message in tongues" in a church service. We somehow all notice it. Why? I don't know.

And I have given a "message in tongues" and even personally it felt different than when I normally speak in tongues. Why? I don't know

But I do no there are some differences in the bible as far as setting.

In acts, there was never an instance of someone interpreting.

It was never a regular church meeting. It was always someone receiving the Spirit for the first time. In all but one it was actually an evangelical situation of preaching Jesus to an unsaved person or group

In acts 2 from 12 to 120 were possibly all speaking in tongues whereas Paul rebukes that sort of performance in a church meeting saying at the very most 2 or 3 and then let one interpret.

Same with the 12 disciples of John and who knows how many of Cornelius's household there was

When Paul said "Do all speak with tongues?" I thought that was rather odd considering he was trying to tell a church to limit the number of tongue speaking and that he would the all spoke with tongues.

Could it be he meant, do all have this ability to speak in a tongue, to be interpreted for church edification? Why do I say that? Because Paul indicated that while there is one Gift of tongues there are many operations

1Co 12:6 And there are differences of workings, but it is the same God working all things in all.

and to another kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues.

It may be just as there are different kinds of languages, there are different functions or operations of the gift of tongues.

Clearly in Acts they spoke in a language that needed not to be interpreted. It was for the hearers of the unbelievers not the church to be edified.

Yet the tongue Paul speaks of no man understands but God. And no body is edified but the speaker unless someone interprets

BTW the word Interpret can mean "translate", but it also means "explains" such as when Jesus or Philip explained what the scriptures meant, though the readers could clearly read what it said, they needed someone to explain it. That's not the same as translate

He that speaks in tongues speaks mysteries...that does not mean "He that speaks in tongues speaks a language that others don't know"

Here is the word
mustḗrion; gen. mustēríou, neut. noun from mústēs (n.f.), a person initiated into sacred mysteries, which is from muéō (G3453), to initiate, learn a secret. A secret, or esoteric knowledge

(I) Denotes in general something hidden or not fully manifest. 2Th_2:7 speaks of "the mystery of iniquity" which began to work in secret and was not then completely disclosed or manifested.
(II) Some sacred thing hidden or secret which is naturally unknown to human reason and is only known by the revelation of God (Rom_11:25; 1Co_4:1; 1Co_14:2; 1Co_15:51; Col_2:2; 1Ti_3:16; see 1Co_2:7).

I never realized this before but that is quite possibly an argument for a "heavenly language"...a hidden or mystery language..that's why nobody understands that language.

Hmmmmmm

Good points Prax, As a side bar, when I received the Holy Ghost I spoke with tongues. Maybe it was because that is how I was conditioned it was to be. But I do know it was after I spoke in tongues that I felt the joy come into my heart. But, over the years I began to speak those same words over and over out loud in service, telling myself I was speaking in tongues. The thing was I was not edifing anyone other than myself. This kind of speaking becomes common in most Pentecostal churches. I came to a point in my life as have many others that unless I am in personal prayer time or feel a very strong directive in the spirit I don't just spout out words I think are speaking in tongues. And when I do speak in tongues I clear my mind that I again am not just repeating former words but it is comming from God and not myself.

That said There have been times when I have been in deep intercetion for someone or something, when all I could do was groan where my heart knew what needed to say and my mouth needed not to say any words. This I understood to be what Paul was speaking of when he said we are speeking directly to God.

But this is just my speaking from experiance, which is why I have come to some of my reasonings. While man can explain things one way true spiritual experiance can in fact open understanding much better.

Paul does instruct us that we can become spoiled of the spiritual things of God by the philosophys of man, by vain deciet, and by running after the rudiments of this world. IMO we philosophize the scripture too much making it more dificult to understand than God intended things to be.

[Praxeas]

I think loud tongues or praise should be done in private. In a church when someone is speaking in tongues so loud everyone else can hear it or praise that it overbears on others is out of order IMO.

God is not deaf and I personally don't want or need to hear someone else speaking in tongues or yelling at the top of their lungs when Im also trying to worship Him

That being said Im fine with everyone or anyone speaking in tongues. Paul's point is love though.

We should be prayerful and mindful of others to be edified