Is The Gift of Tongues For Today?

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by BeenThinkin

They were not found in the womb of John the Baptist's mom either! Even though he was filled with the Holy Ghost while residing there! Just saying'

Been Thinkin

You know, theoretically, if people claim that every time people in the NT received the Holy Spirit, spoke in tongues whether it says they did or not, then wouldn't everyone in the bible that's said to have had the Holy Spirit have had to speak in tongues?

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

But again, only 5 occurrences of tongues. There were FAR more instances of healings...blind, deaf, etc....and like I said, more instances of the dead being raised. In Acts two, it doesn't really specify how many of the 120 spoke with tongues, and there is no consensus among scholars exactly the number.

All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If my math is correct its more like (the Upper Room) 12-120 + (Corneliuses Household) 4-? + (John's Disciple's) 2-? + (Paul) 1 = 19 to 120+ recorded occurences of tongues.

Are you telling me theres more people who prophesied or who healed/were healed or anything else?

EDIT: I forgot the people at the church in Cornith... apparently there were some that spoke in tongues there... so I'll give them at least 2 minimum. That brings our total to: 21 to 120+ recorded occurences of tongues.

That's just what's recorded. The way it's spoken of, cause us to believe it was common. Don't forget all the Samaritans who received the Spirit "the same as at the beginning." How many were there?

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

I don't believe there could have been more than 12 that were referred to in Acts 2. "Peter, standing up with the 11...". So if we go with the number "12", there were FAR more people healed in the bible than spake with tongues.

And what about people that experienced miracles...the feeding of the 5,000 (plus women & children), the millions of Jews that crossed the bottom of the Red Sea, etc. In the big scope of things, tongues is a miniscule part of the supernatural workings of God. So I would wonder, why the pentecostal fascination with it?

Acts 1:14-15
They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[d] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”

Not sure why we are having these gifts compete though... if anything, connected to events where people received the Holy Spirit, tongues was far more dominant. And Paul gave 3 chapters to the topic in Corinthians.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

Yeah, I know very little about him, BT. I like what you say here, though.

What I've read of Branham... I was disappointed.

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Acts 1:14-15
They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[d] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”

Not sure why we are having these gifts compete though... if anything, connected to events where people received the Holy Spirit, tongues was far more dominant. And Paul gave 3 chapters to the topic in Corinthians.

All of who? You have no evidence that all 120 carried over to the Acts 2 events.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

All of who? You have no evidence that all 120 carried over to the Acts 2 events.

See my note on the other thread.

It's quite silly to suggest the "numbering of the 12" means suddenly the 120 disappeared. There were no chapters in this letter. Same setting, same place... no reason to doubt all present.

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by Socialite

See my note on the other thread.

It's quite silly to suggest the "numbering of the 12" means suddenly the 120 disappeared. There were no chapters in this letter. Same setting, same place... no reason to doubt all present.

"Silly"???? Now this is where you can be difficult. You really don't have to call my opinion, which happens to be different than yours, silly. You'd also have to call quite a number of bible scholars "Silly" because there are several who would agree with the lower number. Just because someone doesn't see it the way you do, doesn't make them "Silly."

I posted a well-written, well-articulated, and well-documented article. When you can come up with a better analysis than just calling my view "Silly", let me know.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

"Silly"???? Now this is where you can be difficult. You really don't have to call my opinion, which happens to be different than yours, silly. You'd also have to call quite a number of bible scholars "Silly" because there are several who would agree with the lower number. Just because someone doesn't see it the way you do, doesn't make them "Silly."

I posted a well-written, well-articulated, and well-documented article. When you can come up with a better analysis than just calling my view "Silly", let me know.

Touchy, touchy...

It just seems a little loaded (and suspicious) of any scholar to suggest the same group, in the same scene, just a few paragraphs later, the same room and scene are now a different cast because the text indicates Matthias was now "numbered" among the disciples.

[Socialite]

So why tongues?

1 Cor 14
Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers.

There's definitely something here to be fleshed out later... the whole Isa 28:11 citation, etc.

Perhaps it'll be helpful to get into the Greek here and compare any variations with the word "tongues" (glossalalia) and learn if they are used differently.

Some would argue, because of the Isa 28 reference, it's clear tongues were a sign to the early Church of God's covenant to the Jews -- and that the tongues referenced were a foreign language (whether interpreted or not). Another thing that must be determined then, is what "unintelligible' means in 1 Cor 14, and if that means a language unknown to all, or a language unknown to an indigenous group. Is it a subjective or objective meaning, in other words.

I think the tongues cessationist has to prove why Paul would include tongues as something he clearly does regularly, though, and not just a fantastic supernatural sign to the Jews (and later to qualify Gentiles in Acts 10). In describing his own gift of speaking in tongues, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:14, “my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.” Paul also says this should not be done at a public gathering, which means he did it in private! If it were a sign to unbelieving Jews only, at just a critical hour, why would he do this in private???

On the issue of tongues being unintelligible, a poster friend of mine said this:

According to v. 15, he is determined to do both! “I WILL pray with my spirit,” i.e., I will pray in tongues, and “I WILL pray with the mind also,” i.e., I will pray in Greek so that others who speak and understand Greek can profit from what I say.” Clearly, Paul believed that a spiritual experience beyond the grasp of his mind, which is what I mean by “transrational”, was yet profoundly profitable. He believed that it wasn’t absolutely necessary for an experience to be rationally cognitive for it to be spiritually beneficial and glorifying to God.

This isn’t in any way to denigrate or impugn the crucial importance of one’s intellect in the Christian life. Paul insists that we submit to the renewal of our minds, not their repression (Romans 12:1ff.). All I’m saying, what I believe Paul is saying, is that praying in tongues is eminently beneficial and glorifying to God even though it exceeds or transcends the capacity of our minds to decipher.