Acts 2 vs 1 Cor 14

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Hi everyone,
I'm Charismatic. I do not have a strong Biblical foundation. I am presently reading the book, Strange Fire by John MacArthur. From Cessationists point of view, in Acts 2, the tongues spoken in the upper room, when the Holy Spirit came, was of foreign languages and not senseless babbling. It is also understood that tongue has ceased after the Apostalic age.
Paul said in
1 Cor 14:2--For he who speaks in tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
1 Cor 14:4--He who speaks in tongue edifies himself...unless indeed he interpretes, that the church may receive edification.
It seems confusing that Acts 2, which can be interpreted because they are human languages, does not seem to get along with 1 Cor 14 which is described as "no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries".
I'm needing some understanding here in Cor.
Also, since the gift of tongues have ceased, is Paul addressing his writings to Christians in the Apostlic age only, or also to modern Christians like us, and if so, then, gifts of tongue would not have ceased.
Thank you for your help in clarifying my concerns.
 

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Hi everyone,
I'm Charismatic. I do not have a strong Biblical foundation. I am presently reading the book, Strange Fire by John MacArthur. From Cessationists point of view, in Acts 2, the tongues spoken in the upper room, when the Holy Spirit came, was of foreign languages and not senseless babbling. It is also understood that tongue has ceased after the Apostalic age.
Paul said in
1 Cor 14:2--For he who speaks in tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
1 Cor 14:4--He who speaks in tongue edifies himself...unless indeed he interpretes, that the church may receive edification.
It seems confusing that Acts 2, which can be interpreted because they are human languages, does not seem to get along with 1 Cor 14 which is described as "no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries".
I'm needing some understanding here in Cor.
Also, since the gift of tongues have ceased, is Paul addressing his writings to Christians in the Apostlic age only, or also to modern Christians like us, and if so, then, gifts of tongue would not have ceased.
Thank you for your help in clarifying my concerns.
As a charismatic who does have a strong biblical foundation, I'd recommend you throw that book in the trash. He does not understand that there are two different sources of tongues. One is from your spirit to pray to God with, and one from the Holy Sirit to speak to man with. And, long ago, non charismatic translators interpreting the Greek did not help matters with their 'experiential lack' and subsequent translational errors of capitalizing 'spirit' and 'holy spirit' when it was never referencing God's Spirit, but the holy spirit which all born again believers have.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: gordonhooker
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
Hi everyone,
I'm Charismatic. I do not have a strong Biblical foundation. I am presently reading the book, Strange Fire by John MacArthur. From Cessationists point of view, in Acts 2, the tongues spoken in the upper room, when the Holy Spirit came, was of foreign languages and not senseless babbling. It is also understood that tongue has ceased after the Apostalic age.
Paul said in
1 Cor 14:2--For he who speaks in tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
1 Cor 14:4--He who speaks in tongue edifies himself...unless indeed he interpretes, that the church may receive edification.
It seems confusing that Acts 2, which can be interpreted because they are human languages, does not seem to get along with 1 Cor 14 which is described as "no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries".
I'm needing some understanding here in Cor.
Also, since the gift of tongues have ceased, is Paul addressing his writings to Christians in the Apostlic age only, or also to modern Christians like us, and if so, then, gifts of tongue would not have ceased.
Thank you for your help in clarifying my concerns.

It is important to examine the context of 1 Cor 14. Paul was addressing a problem in the Corinthian church whereby people were speaking in an unrecognized language in the congregation. So where he says 'no one understands' he is not saying no one on the face of the earth would understand, but rather no one in the congregation understands what was spoken. That doesn't mean they were speaking a non-human language. If someone was speaking say Persian in a small Greek house church it is not surprising no one understands. Paul is saying that when someone speaks in an unrecognized language only God (who knows all languages) understands what was said. What was spoken was a mystery. It may be edifying to themselves but no one else is edified unless the language is translated.

Hope that helps.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hi everyone,
I'm Charismatic. I do not have a strong Biblical foundation. I am presently reading the book, Strange Fire by John MacArthur. From Cessationists point of view, in Acts 2, the tongues spoken in the upper room, when the Holy Spirit came, was of foreign languages and not senseless babbling. It is also understood that tongue has ceased after the Apostalic age
I was in a Pentecostal church for many, many years so all of this is not foreign to me.

I am convinced that Paul is talking about languages that were languages that men living somewhere on the earth spoke. That is the gift of tongues and is useful as a witness to unbelievers when speaking to them in their own language such as happened on Pentecost. Or with believers but only when there is an interpretation.

However, there is this verse in chapter 13. I have read many commentary explanations that attempt to explain it and most are honest enough to give more than one interpretation.
1Co 13:1 If with the tongues of men and of messengers [angelos] I speak, and have not love, I have become brass sounding, or a cymbal tinkling;

I am not a cessationist, I don't believe that the gifts have totally disappeared, BUT I am sure that most people do not have these gifts spoken of in 14.
I do believe there are occasions when God temporary empowers a person to use one of the gifts.
I personally believe that Spurgeon had the gift of prophecy. Many people think that prophecy means speaking things only of the future but it doesn't. Prophecy is speaking things that one cannot know by any human means, such as telling a stranger something that they had done or something about them that the speaker had no way of knowing. Like when Jesus tells the Samaritan woman at the well about her life.
I'm sure John MacArthur would argue with me about Spurgeon but he would have to call Spurgeon himself a liar, not me.
 
Upvote 0

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
As to 'context' we must realize that Paul was speaking to a Charismatic church which probably surpassed anything we even experience today. I say that, regarding the degree of true tongue speaking Charismatics there even are, in a single modern day charismatic congregation. Nobody was preaching cessasionism then. It was proclaimed FOR ALL and TO ALL. Something totally unlike the modern day untruth foisted by those who simply believe they have ALL that is available from God, therefore WE must be wrong. :sigh:

As an example, this immature CHARISMATIC church at Corinth was supposed to limit the number of PROPHETS speaking to a maximum of three...THREE!!!. Hello, out there in 'church world'.

1CO 14:29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.

Today, how many Charismatics on this forum can say their congregation has even one recognized PROPHET which has an authoritative/administrative position to stand up and speak in their church. Especially without them getting 'approval' first from their pastor!!!! And not just that, but show me 'a charismatic church' which considers their PROPHET to be OVER their pastor/teacher?

EPH 4:11 And his gifts were that some should be apostles (first), some prophets (second), some evangelists, some pastors and teachers (third),

1CO 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers,.... (Apparently pastor isn't even worth mentioning. Which isn't really surprising, to one who realizes the word 'pastors' is only used once in the whole NT.


But let's get back to 'the context' Paul was dealing with. Prior to dealing with 'the Prophets' immature use, he'd already dealt with ALL those who were speaking in a prayer tongue in verse 27. And in that 'same context' those being admonished, simply did not understand themselves, that just because you get all emotionally worked up in a service does not mean that you jump up and speak in your prayer tongue thinking that you are ministering the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit. But, even if you weren't, Paul still wanted this IMMATURE CHARISMATIC church to let two or three tongue speakers do so, just in case one of them might actually have been anointed of the Holy Spirit, and really wasn't just speaking in the tongue language of their spirit.

1 Corinthians 14:27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

And if there was no interpreter, which would be the case if it was your spirit's prayer language, THEN you were to shut your mouth concerning addressing the congregation and realize it was just YOU praying in the tongue of your spirit, a language for which there's no earthly translation, just as scripture declares. But, does Paul then say quit praying in tongues to this spirit talking believer???? NO!; he just says to take your loudly spoken words to the assembly down in volume, and continue in prayer between you and God which is the purpose in 'this setting'. No different than when someone is praying softly in English, next to you, in a congregational setting....or Spanish (common where I live), but which I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

1 Corinthians 14:28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak/laleo to himself and to God.

2980 laleo {lal-eh'-o}
prolonged form of an otherwise obsolete verb
(1) to utter a voice or emit a sound
(2) to speak
(2.a) to use the tongue or the faculty of speech
(2.b) to utter articulate sounds

I hope this perspective, from one who has spoken with the Spirit's 'gift of tongues' in an assembly when I felt an 'unction' from The Holy Spirit to do so. An assembly where another stepped out in faith to give what he believed was an 'unction' to manifest the Spirit's 'gift of interpretation'.
 
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Thanks to all. I feel that my questions has been answered in part and it's becoming a little clearer. Your replies have given me new things to think about. Having been in a Charismatic church for a while, I have some things to unlearn. Thanks to the book that I'm asking questions now.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I hope this perspective, from one who has spoken with the Spirit's 'gift of tongues' in an assembly when I felt an 'unction' from The Holy Spirit to do so. An assembly where another stepped out in faith to give what he believed was an 'unction' to manifest the Spirit's 'gift of interpretation'.
Do you think the interpretation of unknown tongues (not of any human language) to the assembly is subject to error since these interpretation cannot be verified? It doesn't seem logical for me to think that God would allow His intention to be manipulated knowingly or unknowingly. After all, church leaders are human, and they discern in the flesh from time to time.
 
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I was in a Pentecostal church for many, many years so all of this is not foreign to me.

I am convinced that Paul is talking about languages that were languages that men living somewhere on the earth spoke. That is the gift of tongues and is useful as a witness to unbelievers when speaking to them in their own language such as happened on Pentecost. Or with believers but only when there is an interpretation.

However, there is this verse in chapter 13. I have read many commentary explanations that attempt to explain it and most are honest enough to give more than one interpretation.
1Co 13:1 If with the tongues of men and of messengers [angelos] I speak, and have not love, I have become brass sounding, or a cymbal tinkling;

I am not a cessationist, I don't believe that the gifts have totally disappeared, BUT I am sure that most people do not have these gifts spoken of in 14.
I do believe there are occasions when God temporary empowers a person to use one of the gifts.
I personally believe that Spurgeon had the gift of prophecy. Many people think that prophecy means speaking things only of the future but it doesn't. Prophecy is speaking things that one cannot know by any human means, such as telling a stranger something that they had done or something about them that the speaker had no way of knowing. Like when Jesus tells the Samaritan woman at the well about her life.
I'm sure John MacArthur would argue with me about Spurgeon but he would have to call Spurgeon himself a liar, not me.

Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks:)
 
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
It is important to examine the context of 1 Cor 14. Paul was addressing a problem in the Corinthian church whereby people were speaking in an unrecognized language in the congregation. So where he says 'no one understands' he is not saying no one on the face of the earth would understand, but rather no one in the congregation understands what was spoken. That doesn't mean they were speaking a non-human language. If someone was speaking say Persian in a small Greek house church it is not surprising no one understands. Paul is saying that when someone speaks in an unrecognized language only God (who knows all languages) understands what was said. What was spoken was a mystery. It may be edifying to themselves but no one else is edified unless the language is translated.

Hope that helps.
That was good explanation. But how does one edify himself when he doesn't understand the language he spoke?
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
First of all it should be pointed out the word 'unknown' throughout this chapter does not appear in the original Greek. It was added by the translators of the antiquated King James version to try and help its readers understand the language spoken was not recognized. However people today quote the KJV and falsely teach that an 'unknown tongue' means a non-human language.

That was good explanation. But how does one edify himself when he doesn't understand the language he spoke?

They were edifying themselves, not because they understood the words they were speaking, but because they felt good about being able to miraculously speak a foreign language they had never learned. However that is a selfish reason and Paul was criticising the Corinthians for doing so. Notice the 'but' immediately after - they should have been edifying the church, not themselves. The purpose of spiritual gifts is to benefit others, not self:

1 Cor 12:7 "Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good."

1 Peter 4:10 "Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others"


Spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (see 1 Cor 13:1-3) and love is not self serving (1 Cor 13:5).

Hope that helps.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Yes, that helps alot. Thanks:)

Romans 8:26 "Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. We do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

This should be my last question. Is this verse related to tongue? What does it mean by "but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered?" Many thanks:)
 
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Do you think the interpretation of unknown tongues (not of any human language) to the assembly is subject to error since these interpretation cannot be verified? It doesn't seem logical for me to think that God would allow His intention to be manipulated knowingly or unknowingly. After all, church leaders are human, and they discern in the flesh from time to time.
Okay, now I understand that it is referring to foreign human languages and will not be subject to manipulation. Thanks:)
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
Romans 8:26 "Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. We do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

This should be my last question. Is this verse related to tongue? What does it mean by "but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered?" Many thanks:)

That passage in Romans is referring to the Spirit interceding for believers suffering under the weight of a sinful world and finding it difficult to pray.

There are a number of reasons that passage is not related to tongues:
  • No mention is made of 'tongues', and it would be completely out of place in this context.

  • It is the Spirit who “groans” not believers.

  • Tongues were words of praise, not groans of suffering. The disciples were not 'groaning' at Pentecost.

  • The Spirit's groanings cannot be uttered, indicating they are silent to our ears, not verbal as was the case with tongues.

  • The Spirit's intercession in Rom 8:26 applies to all believers, whereas not everyone was given the gift of tongues (1 Cor 12:29-30).

Hope that helps.
 
Upvote 0

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
That passage in Romans is referring to the Spirit interceding for believers suffering under the weight of a sinful world and finding it difficult to pray.

There are a number of reasons that passage is not related to tongues:
  • No mention is made of 'tongues', and it would be completely out of place in this context.

  • It is the Spirit who “groans” not believers.

  • Tongues were words of praise, not groans of suffering. The disciples were not 'groaning' at Pentecost.

  • The Spirit's groanings cannot be uttered, indicating they are silent to our ears, not verbal as was the case with tongues.

  • The Spirit's intercession in Rom 8:26 applies to all believers, whereas not everyone was given the gift of tongues (1 Cor 12:29-30).

Hope that helps.

Thanks again. Really helps. You're a true swordsman:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: swordsman1
Upvote 0

Hillsage

One 4 Him & Him 4 all
Supporter
Jun 12, 2009
5,244
1,767
The land of OZ
✟322,350.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Do you think the interpretation of unknown tongues (not of any human language) to the assembly is subject to error since these interpretation cannot be verified?
Absolutely I believe tongues given to an assembly is subject to error, and so did Paul. That was the point I was making in my last post in how Paul wanted us to deal with 'both' Prophets and tongues from the general assembly. He said to "weigh what is judged" when prophets speak. Why would he tell us to do such a thing? Those who are Spirit led are to also have spiritual judgement/discernment. And even when 'a Prophet' speaks in the NT it is subject to acceptance or rejection by those who hear. And rejection is what Paul did when people prophesied "by the Spirit" telling him not to go to Jerusalem. He could have gone to Rome a free man, but because of his disobedience to several 'prophetic warnings', he went as a prisoner in chains until the day he died.

ACT 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

Subject to error is truly the bane of the church today. The theology of orthdoxy is so scattered that confusion is the order of the day for most in the church. Spend a little time here and tell me that your next quote isn't fulfilled in this very thread which you started.

It doesn't seem logical for me to think that God would allow His intention to be manipulated knowingly or unknowingly. After all, church leaders are human, and they discern in the flesh from time to time.
That's the problem with 'logic'. You are at this very forum saying that since you read a book by a man who is absolutely anti Charismatic you appear to be 'logically' siding with him. You've said "I'm Charismatic", but I'm now wondering just what you mean in saying that? Does it mean you go to a Charismatic church? Or does it mean you 'truly' received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and your spirit has been freed to speak through you bypassing your mind's understanding? Please share your testimony concerning this issue.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jeremiah33

Active Member
Nov 5, 2017
29
5
61
Singapore
✟9,739.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
That's the problem with 'logic'. You are at this very forum saying that since you read a book by a man who is absolutely anti Charismatic you appear to be 'logically' siding with him. You've said "I'm Charismatic", but I'm now wondering just what you mean in saying that? Does it mean you go to a Charismatic church? Or does it mean you 'truly' received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and your spirit has been freed to speak through you bypassing your mind's understanding? Please share your testimony concerning this issue.

I am siding with the truth, not the man. I'm Charismatic as long as I'm in the same church. I have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and I speak in tongue. I've had questions about Charismatic gifts that led me to read the book. I'm searching for the truth that will set me free. I believe His Word is sufficient for me.

Hope that helps:)
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As a charismatic who does have a strong biblical foundation, I'd recommend you throw that book in the trash.
I agree.
He does not understand that there are two different sources of tongues. One is from your spirit to pray to God with, and one from the Holy Spirit to speak to man with.
Actually, there are 3. I have come across those who were demonized with a spirit of false tongues.

As far as I have seen in scripture, the event of Acts 2 where the tongues was in known languages was a one-time event and has not been repeated since.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you think the interpretation of unknown tongues (not of any human language) to the assembly is subject to error since these interpretation cannot be verified? It doesn't seem logical for me to think that God would allow His intention to be manipulated knowingly or unknowingly. After all, church leaders are human, and they discern in the flesh from time to time.
How would that be any different than a word of prophecy? Or knowledge? Or discerning of spirits?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Where does it say the other instances of tongues were non-human?
Where does it say they were known human languages?

Paul uses phrases like "tongues of men AND ANGELS," and "unknown tongue." Without any notation that what was spoken was human, it would fall into those categories. Not human.

And if they were known languages, why do we need the gift of interpretation?
 
Upvote 0