Do all speak with tongues?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by houston

"Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?"

The answer is, "no." I think most will agree.

Some would say that Paul is differentiating between the gift of tongues and initial evidence. I can not find where the scripture draws that line. So, I'm asking those of you who believe that Paul was addressing tongues as a gift rather than initial evidence, (please) show me where the Bible speaks of tongues as a gift and a distinction of tongues as initial evidence that someone has received the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

I also ask that those of you who do NOT believe in initial evidence to (please) refrain from posting here. This is an honest post, and I do not want to see it turn into a debate.

Cordially,
Houston

1 Cor 12:9 lists "faith" as one of the gifts of the Spirit. It is said "to another, faith by the same Spirit". Thus, not everyone has the same gift, and that includes faith.

Yet, we know everyone who has the Spirit DOES have faith. So obviously, two different kinds of faith are in view. One, the faith everyone who receives the Spirit has. Two, the faith that certain Christians have as a special working of the Spirit. So then there is the faith that is universal among true believers, and then there is a special operation of faith imparted by the Spirit to certain believers for certain purposes. Not all believers have THAT special gift of "faith".

Just so with tongues.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

1 Cor 12:9 lists "faith" as one of the gifts of the Spirit. It is said "to another, faith by the same Spirit". Thus, not everyone has the same gift, and that includes faith.

Yet, we know everyone who has the Spirit DOES have faith. So obviously, two different kinds of faith are in view. One, the faith everyone who receives the Spirit has. Two, the faith that certain Christians have as a special working of the Spirit. So then there is the faith that is universal among true believers, and then there is a special operation of faith imparted by the Spirit to certain believers for certain purposes. Not all believers have THAT special gift of "faith".

Just so with tongues.

awesome

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by houston

"Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?"

The answer is, "no." I think most will agree.

Some would say that Paul is differentiating between the gift of tongues and initial evidence. I can not find where the scripture draws that line. So, I'm asking those of you who believe that Paul was addressing tongues as a gift rather than initial evidence, (please) show me where the Bible speaks of tongues as a gift and a distinction of tongues as initial evidence that someone has received the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

I also ask that those of you who do NOT believe in initial evidence to (please) refrain from posting here. This is an honest post, and I do not want to see it turn into a debate.

Cordially,
Houston

Awesome question.

I'll share my understanding. Others might have better insight to how to answer your question than I do.

As you mentioned, there is the initial evidence of tongues and then there is the gift of tongues:

1.) Tongues as initial evidence.
2.) Gift of Tongues.

Let's look at the Gift of Tongues first. This will help us distinguish the two in Scripture. The Gift of Tongues has specific instructions regarding its use:

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

When the Gift of Tongues is at play, there can be two or, at most, three speakers giving an utterance (some might say, or one speaker limited to three utterances). This is to prevent utterance after utterance, after utterance during gatherings. Also, those giving an utterance are to speak in turn. Lastly, there is to be an interpreter. And if no interpreter is present, those who gave the utterance(s) are to remain silent and return to praying with the congregation.

These rules prevent this gift from being abused and used to take over gatherings. It also ensures that the congregation gathering is edified by the utterance by virtue of the gift of interpretation being in operation.

Now. That's the Gift of Tongues. In the book of Acts we see Tongues as Initial Evidence when people receive the Holy Ghost. In Pentecost we saw 120 begin speaking in tongues all at once, so there is no limitation on the number of speakers. In addition we don't see an interpreter present. In fact, we saw the unique manifestation of others hearing their tongues, every man, in the language wherein he was born. In Acts 8 we read about how Samaria received the Holy Ghost and Simon "saw" that the baptism of the Holy Ghost was given through the laying on of hands and offered to buy the gift. This indicates that there was a sign for Simon to see. Thus it is implied that the entre community receiving the Holy Ghost and speaking in tongues. No limitation on number of speakers is present. Also, no mention of an interpretation. In Acts 19 we see 12 people filled with the spirit and speaking in tongues. No limitation on speakers or interpreter is mentioned. Therefore, we can rest assured that these tongues are distinct from the Gift of Tongues. In addition, everyone speaking with tongues in Acts were new converts. They weren't individuals already filled with the Spirit. When dealing with the gift of tongues, one is using a gift of the Spirit that they have previously received.

Based on these details, I believe we see a clear distinction between the two in Scripture. Now, not all have the "Gift of Tongues". But in Acts, everyone filled with the Spirit spoke in tongues as initial evidence.

Hope that helps. God bless.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Awesome question.

I'll share my understanding. Others might have better insight to how to answer your question than I do.

As you mentioned, there is the initial evidence of tongues and then there is the gift of tongues:

1.) Tongues as initial evidence.
2.) Gift of Tongues.

Let's look at the Gift of Tongues first. This will help us distinguish the two in Scripture. The Gift of Tongues has specific instructions regarding its use:

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

When the Gift of Tongues is at play, there can be two or, at most, three speakers giving an utterance (some might say, or one speaker limited to three utterances). This is to prevent utterance after utterance, after utterance during gatherings. Also, those giving an utterance are to speak in turn. Lastly, there is to be an interpreter. And if no interpreter is present, those who gave the utterance(s) are to remain silent and return to praying with the congregation.

These rules prevent this gift from being abused and used to take over gatherings. It also ensures that the congregation gathering is edified by the utterance by virtue of the gift of interpretation being in operation.

Now. That's the Gift of Tongues. In the book of Acts we see Tongues as Initial Evidence when people receive the Holy Ghost. In Pentecost we saw 120 begin speaking in tongues all at once, so there is no limitation on the number of speakers. In addition we don't see an interpreter present. In fact, we saw the unique manifestation of others hearing their tongues, every man, in the language wherein he was born. In Acts 8 we read about how Samaria received the Holy Ghost and Simon "saw" that the baptism of the Holy Ghost was given through the laying on of hands and offered to buy the gift. This indicates that there was a sign for Simon to see. Thus it is implied that the entre community receiving the Holy Ghost and speaking in tongues. No limitation on number of speakers is present. Also, no mention of an interpretation. In Acts 19 we see 12 people filled with the spirit and speaking in tongues. No limitation on speakers or interpreter is mentioned. Therefore, we can rest assured that these tongues are distinct from the Gift of Tongues. In addition, everyone speaking with tongues in Acts were new converts. They weren't individuals already filled with the Spirit. When dealing with the gift of tongues, one is using a gift of the Spirit that they have previously received.

Based on these details, I believe we see a clear distinction between the two in Scripture. Now, not all have the "Gift of Tongues". But in Acts, everyone filled with the Spirit spoke in tongues as initial evidence.

Hope that helps. God bless.

[votivesoul]

I find the answer to be much more rudimentary and concise. The Greek word behind "gift" as in "gift of the Holy Spirit" (e.g. Acts 2:39) is not the same word as "gift of diverse kinds of tongues" (1 Corinthians 12).

Two different words imply two different concepts. The use of the word "gift" in Acts is more in keeping with something given, like a present. The use of gift in 1 Corinthians 12 is charismata, from the Greek word charis the most typical word translated "grace" in the NT. So, these charismata are special endowments of a specific "grace".

Yes, grace is a gift, of course. But grace is not a charismata. Grace is a gift as in a present, something given. A free gift, no less. A charismata, then, is a heightened form of the grace already given by the Spirit of Grace (i.e. Holy Spirit) at salvation, administered by God for Body ministry.

[houston]

That's interesting.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by houston

"Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?"

The answer is, "no." I think most will agree.

Some would say that Paul is differentiating between the gift of tongues and initial evidence. I can not find where the scripture draws that line. So, I'm asking those of you who believe that Paul was addressing tongues as a gift rather than initial evidence, (please) show me where the Bible speaks of tongues as a gift and a distinction of tongues as initial evidence that someone has received the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

I also ask that those of you who do NOT believe in initial evidence to (please) refrain from posting here. This is an honest post, and I do not want to see it turn into a debate.

Cordially,
Houston

I won't turn this into a debate. In my opinion:

The concept that tongues in 1 Corinthians 12 is about a "gift of tongues" as opposed to the "initial evidence of tongues" isn't a distinction that the bible explicitly reveals. Instead it's a derived belief that is absolutely necessary if the initial evidence of tongues doctrine is true.

If the initial evidence of tongues doctrine isn't true then Paul asserting that all do not speak in tongues would be universally true and there would be no biblical necessity for deriving the belief of different types of tongues (although there could still be different types of tongues even without scripture that suggests it).

[houston]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I won't turn this into a debate. In my opinion:

The concept that tongues in 1 Corinthians 12 is about a "gift of tongues" as opposed to the "initial evidence of tongues" isn't a distinction that the bible explicitly reveals. Instead it's a derived belief that is absolutely necessary if the initial evidence of tongues doctrine is true.

If the initial evidence of tongues doctrine isn't true then Paul asserting that all do not speak in tongues would be universally true and there would be no biblical necessity for deriving the belief of different types of tongues (although there could still be different types of tongues even without scripture that suggests it).

Right.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I won't turn this into a debate.

In other words, you want to make claims without any responsibility to support and defend those claims.

In my opinion:

The concept that tongues in 1 Corinthians 12 is about a "gift of tongues" as opposed to the "initial evidence of tongues" isn't a distinction that the bible explicitly reveals. Instead it's a derived belief that is absolutely necessary if the initial evidence of tongues doctrine is true.

If the initial evidence of tongues doctrine isn't true then Paul asserting that all do not speak in tongues would be universally true and there would be no biblical necessity for deriving the belief of different types of tongues (although there could still be different types of tongues even without scripture that suggests it).

This reasoning necessarily results in the conclusion that faith is not a universal gift to Christians. But we all know faith is universal to Christians, therefore the reasoning is reduced to an absurdity and thereby refuted beyond repair.

Faith is listed as a gift in 1 Cor 12. Paul asks "Do all...?" and lists several gifts, but not all. The gifts are described as different operations giving rise to different members' varied roles in the Body. Therefore the list following "Do all...?" is not exhaustive but representative (a sample). And therefore, not all have "faith".

IF there aren't two kinds of faith, then the conclusion is inescapable: faith is not universal to all the saved. But we know faith is universal to all the saved, therefore there is more than one kind of faith. And if there is more than one kind of faith, there can be more than one kind of tongues. Specifically, a universal expression of tongues, and a particular or special expression of tongues described in 1 Cor 12-14.

In fact, I would go further and suggest this distinction is specifically alluded to in ch 14, but we aren't in a debate so I'll forbear.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Hi Houston, I'm going to just add my two cents in the interim. I'm sure someone will come along who can explain things much better than I can.

Jesus said we must be born again of the water and spirit John 3:5

John said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire Matthew 3:11

Peter said we are born again by the gospel 1 Peter 1:23-25

According to Luke 24 the preaching of the gospel began at Jerusalem

The gospel embraces Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and could not have happened until Jesus died

In Acts 1:4-8 the disciples asked when the Kingdom of God would come and they were told to wait for the promise of the Holy Ghost

The Kingdom of God is righteousness peace and joy in the HG, so it could not come until the HG was given Romans 14:17

On the day of Pentecost they were all filled with the HG and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance Acts 2:1-4. This is when the supernatural Kingdom of God was set up upon the earth.

When the gentiles received the Holy Ghost in response to the gospel, they knew it because they heard them speak with tongues Acts 10:44-46

So speaking in tongues is initial evidence.

There is a difference between the Gift (singular) of the Holy Ghost Acts 2:38 1 Corinthians 12:13

and the Gifts (plural) of the Spirit 1 Corinthians 12 Romans 12

Amanah please check your quote of John 3:5 and correct it.