Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrine?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

But, once again, we're making assumptions that there are different types of tongues.

BUt, as I said, I won't discuss that here, it's a thread hijacker. I'll start another thread, maybe!

It's not an assumption.

If you believe those who speak in tongues or those who prophecy when they receive the Spirit are receiving the GIFT of tongues and/or prophecy then my question is legit. Why did God take the gift of tongues away from me?

On the other hand if you believe that everyone speaks in tongues when they receive the Holy Spirit and that this experience is truly different than the gift of tongues spoken of in Corinthians then it would explain why Paul asks the rhetorical question, do all speak in tongues?, in the context of the gifts of the Spirit and why I no longer speak in tongues.

Why would you distinguish the gift of tongues being used to speak a message to the church and the gift of tongues being used to edify in prayer? Paul doesn't make that distinction in Corinthians....it is the same gift used in two different settings. Just as there are differences of administration of the gift of healing.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Is there any scripture that separates the "initial evidence" of tongues from either prayer language, or the gift of tongues?

It's not expiclitly stated in any single verse, but contextually, it's fairly easy to see that the NT makes the distinctions among the 3 manifestations of speaking in tongues...

1...We see repeatedly in Acts where people spoke in tongues when they initially received the gift of the Holy Ghost.... (Explicitly stated in Acts 2,10, and 19... and also implied in Acts 8)

2... But Paul also speaks of tongues as a prayer language, such as when he refers to "praying with the spirit" as opposed to praying with the mind. (1 Cor 14:13-17) This is tongues for the individual's benefit, since this edifies their own spirit. In this instance no interpretation is necessary, because the person is speaking to God in the spirit realm. Here Paul even gives an example of how a person sitting at a meal should not pray in tongues at the giving of thanks, because it doesnt bless the others who are sitting at the table. So clearly this is a different manifestation of speaking tongues than what we see when someone receives the baptism of the spirit.

3... In the same chapter he speaks of the gift of tongues along with th gift of interpretation, to benefit the church body. Paul contrasts the gift of tongues with the gift of prophecy... and Paul makes it known that tongues plus interpretation is equivalent to the gift of prophecy, while the gift of prophecy is itself greater than the gift of tongues since prophecy edifies the church body. This is the type of "message in tongues and interpretation" that fairly common in Apostolic churches. From the context of that chapter we clearly see two separate manifestations of the tongues there-- (one to benefit the individual, and one in conjunction with the gift of interpretation, to benefit the church)

So from New Testament context, we see 3 different manifestations of tongues... (namely, two distinct manifestations of the gift of tongues, as mentioned above --- as well as the speaking in tongues that we see accompanying the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit)

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

But, once again, we're making assumptions that there are different types of tongues.

BUt, as I said, I won't discuss that here, it's a thread hijacker. I'll start another thread, maybe!

There are, as seen in 1 Cor chapter 14, and even...

1 Cor 12:10

10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

It's not expiclitly stated in any single verse, but contextually, it's fairly easy to see that the NT makes the distinctions among the 3 manifestations of speaking in tongues...

1...We see repeatedly in Acts where people spoke in tongues when they initially received the gift of the Holy Ghost.... (Explicitly stated in Acts 2,10, and 19... and also implied in Acts 8)

2... But Paul also speaks of tongues as a prayer language, such as when he refers to "praying with the spirit" as opposed to praying with the mind. (1 Cor 14:13-17) This is tongues for the individual's benefit, since this edifies their own spirit. In this instance no interpretation is necessary, because the person is speaking to God in the spirit realm. Here Paul even gives an example of how a person sitting at a meal should not pray in tongues at the giving of thanks, because it doesnt bless the others who are sitting at the table. So clearly this is a different manifestation of speaking tongues than what we see when someone receives the baptism of the spirit.

3... In the same chapter he speaks of the gift of tongues along with th gift of interpretation, to benefit the church body. Paul contrasts the gift of tongues with the gift of prophecy... and Paul makes it known that tongues plus interpretation is equivalent to the gift of prophecy, while the gift of prophecy is itself greater than the gift of tongues since prophecy edifies the church body. This is the type of "message in tongues and interpretation" that fairly common in Apostolic churches. From the context of that chapter we clearly see two separate manifestations of the tongues there-- (one to benefit the individual, and one in conjunction with the gift of interpretation, to benefit the church)

So from New Testament context, we see 3 different manifestations of tongues... (namely, two distinct manifestations of the gift of tongues, as mentioned above --- as well as the speaking in tongues that we see accompanying the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit)


There are, as seen in 1 Cor chapter 14, and even...

1 Cor 12:10

10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

Excellent summation, TR, thanks for taking the time to put it together.

However, my original question still stands - when Paul said "not all speak with tongues" how do we know for sure he was ONLY referring to the "gift of tongues"?

Especially since there are instances of folks receiving the Holy Ghost in the BOok of Acts and it is not stated that they spoke with tongues?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Excellent summation, TR, thanks for taking the time to put it together.

However, my original question still stands - when Paul said "not all speak with tongues" how do we know for sure he was ONLY referring to the "gift of tongues"?

Especially since there are instances of folks receiving the Holy Ghost in the BOok of Acts and it is not stated that they spoke with tongues?

How do we know? From the context.

In the book of Acts they are showing instances of new believers receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit for the first time.

In the context of 1Cor 12 and 14, Paul was not speaking about the gift/baptism of the Holy Spirit. He was speaking of to church folks about spiritual gifts. That is the critical difference.

The very chapter starts out by making that clear immediately:

1Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

So he's clearly speaking of tongues in terms of being the gift of tongues in this context, as he continues:

9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

All the other things he speaks of in those verses are referring to the gifts of the spirit. So why should we think otherwise when he mentions tongues in that context ?

Even as he continues in the chapter he is clearly still talking about spiritual gifts...

29Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

When he asks here: "do all speak with tongues?" (a rhetorical question whose answer is clearly "no"), the implication is obvious in this context. He is saying not all have the gifts of healing, not all have the gift of prophecy, not all have the gift of tongues, not all have the gift of interpretation, etc.

This is the clear and natural understanding that follows the context of the whole chapter. I believe if a person approaches the text with a clear-headed mindset, without trying to insert their own meaning or preconceived notions into it, the passage's meaning becomes abundantly clear.

Paul is not saying "do all speak in tongues when they receive he baptism of the Spirit?" or even implying anything regarding that. He was addressing the church at Corinth -- that is, saved folks. Paul had already said to them: "by one Spirit we are baptized into one body" (v 13) , so it was understood they had already received the Holy Ghost, so this was a totally separate discussion . There is nothing anywhere in those chapters (12-14) to indicate that Paul is referring to tongues as it relates to the gift/baptism of the Holy Spirit.

[Hoovie]

TR,
Chapter 14 when Paul says he would that we ALL spake in tongues is he referencing the "Gift of Tongues" or a sign they should expect of the Spirit indwelling?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

TR,
Chapter 14 when Paul says he would that we ALL spake in tongues is he referencing the "Gift of Tongues" or a sign they should expect of the Spirit indwelling?

Well, as I said in my previous posts to Mike, I believe context of the entire chapter makes it pretty clear, beginning from the very first verse:

1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

4He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

He is speaking about the "gift of tongues" here; he is not referring to the sign of one initially receiving baptism/indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

To paraphrase it, I think Paul's meaning in verse 5 could be accurately summed up this way:

"I'd be happy if you all had the gift of tongues, but I'd be even happier if you all had the gift of prophecy; because a person who prophesies is greater (that is, of more value to the church) than one who has the gift of tongues, unless he has the gift of interpretation also, for the edification of the body."

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Well, as I said in my previous posts to Mike, I believe context of the entire chapter makes it pretty clear, beginning from the very first verse:

1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

4He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

He is speaking about the "gift of tongues" here; he is not referring to the sign of one initially receiving baptism/indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

To paraphrase it, I think Paul's meaning in verse 5 could be accurately summed up this way:

"I'd be happy if you all had the gift of tongues, but I'd be even happier if you all had the gift of prophecy; because a person who prophesies is greater (that is, of more value to the church) than one who has the gift of tongues, unless he has the gift of interpretation also, for the edification of the body."

So, then when someone speaks in tongues in prayer it is the gift of tongues, EXCEPT if it is the first (initial) time he speaks - in that case it is not the gift of tongues?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

So, then when someone speaks in tongues in prayer it is the gift of tongues, EXCEPT if it is the first (initial) time he speaks - in that case it is not the gift of tongues?

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.

[Hoovie]

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.

Thank you for responding.

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

[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?