Number One Flaw in Cessationism

[Saint Steven]

It is not common knowledge that there are two different types of tongues. The difference is the direction.

Mark 16 - TO GOD, no interpretation - personal prayer
1 Cor. 12 - FROM GOD, must be interpreted - messages for profit of all.

You have probably seen me post this before. I identify at least five uses for tongues.

Five Different Uses of Tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in our spirit
3) Prophetic ministry language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in our spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

 

[CharismaticLady]

You have probably seen me post this before. I identify at least five uses for tongues.

Five Different Uses of Tongues
1) Personal prayer language - Speaking to/with God
2) Intercessory prayer language - Praying for others in our spirit
3) Prophetic ministry language - Addressing the whole church/preferably with interpretation
4) Singing in our spirit - Singing in tongues/worship activity
5) Evangelistic language - Speaking the message of God to a people in their own language (not yours)

1, 2 and 4 is Mark 16.
3 is 1 Cor. 12

5 contradicts 1 Cor. 14:2 so needs to be rethought, especially how the devout Jews on the Day of Pentecost understood the tongues. It was supernatural, not natural. If you read the account closely, all of them heard THEM, meaning everyone speaking in tongues, in their own language. It was not that the disciples SPOKE their language, because in the natural no one understands tongues; it was what they each HEARD. How? By the only gift designed for understanding supernatural tongues. By interpretation.

You may ask how could they receive a gift without believing in Christ? They are gifts of the Spirit and it is He that draws men to Christ. It is totally up to the Spirit. The mockers didn't love God so weren't already His and just heard gibberish, but the devout Jews were His already, and God wanted to catch their attention. And 3000 were converted in one dayl

 

[NBB]

1, 2 and 4 is Mark 16.
3 is 1 Cor. 12

5 contradicts 1 Cor. 14:2 so needs to be rethought, especially how the devout Jews on the Day of Pentecost understood the tongues. It was supernatural, not natural. If you read the account closely, all of them heard THEM, meaning everyone speaking in tongues, in their own language. It was not that the disciples SPOKE their language, because in the natural no one understands tongues; it was what they each HEARD. How? By the only gift designed for understanding supernatural tongues. By interpretation.

You may ask how could they receive a gift without believing in Christ? They are gifts of the Spirit and it is He that draws men to Christ. It is totally up to the Spirit. The mockers didn't love God so weren't already His and just heard gibberish, but the devout Jews were His already, and God wanted to catch their attention. And 3000 were converted in one dayl

I think tongues is speaking a true language, so personally i believe that language can be any language known or unknown, i really don't think the people were interpreting there, the disciples actually spoke their languages. What is the difference between an known language and a not known one? they are both languages. I've heard of cases where people spoke unknown languages to them, but other people understood what they were saying.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think tongues is speaking a true language, so personally i believe that language can be any language known or unknown, i really don't think the people were interpreting there, the disciples actually spoke their languages. What is the difference between an unkown language and a not known one? they are both languages.

That is not scriptural. 1 Corinthians 14:2 is the rule that all tongues must fit. They are not naturally understood by man.

I've heard of cases where people spoke unknown languages to them, but other people understood what they were saying.

Yes, even though they didn't know, they had just received interpretation of tongues. I've heard of it myself at my church in Arizona, but I also know that the tongues this girl heard, waere NOT English, but she swore that is all she heard, English.

 

[NBB]

That is not scriptural. 1 Corinthians 14:2 is the rule that all tongues must fit. They are not naturally understood by man.



Yes, even though they didn't know, they had just received interpretation of tongues. I've heard of it myself at my church in Arizona, but I also know that the tongues this girl heard, waere NOT English, but she swore that is all she heard, English.

That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Saint Steven]

That doesn't make sense to me.

I'm with you on that.
On Pentecost they spoke in more than one tongue. (other tongues)
Regarding spiritual gifts, there is speaking in different kinds of tongues.

Acts 2:4
All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

1 Corinthians 12:10
to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.

 

[CharismaticLady]

That doesn't make sense to me.

cc: @Saint Steven

You can both use your human common sense, or you can believe God, who is Supernatural, and so are His gifts.

1 Corinthians 14:2

2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

 

[Saint Steven]

cc: @Saint Steven

You can both use your human common sense, or you can believe God, who is Supernatural, and so are His gifts.

1 Corinthians 14:2

2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

Oh, boy... you played the "God card". Seriously?
Somehow your opinion on this is believing "God" and our opinion is reduced to "human common sense" ??? (ouch)

Are you not claiming that the one who speaks in tongues, speaks to people who hear their own language supernaturally? Yet your proof text says the one who speaks in tongues does NOT speak to people. If this is so, why do you claim there are supernatural hearers? (when God is the one being spoken to)

Just to clear, I don't think the context of 1Cor.14 supports your claim. The comparison is between prophecy and tongues. And more specifically about edifying the body through spiritual gifts. In fact, if what you are claiming is true, there is no need for the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues.

That being said, I do not dismiss the experience you had with this phenomenon. But I think it was the exception, not the rule, as it were. I can't put the Spirit in a box and create limitations for what is possible.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Oh, boy... you played the "God card". Seriously?
Somehow your opinion on this is believing "God" and our opinion is reduced to "human common sense" ??? (ouch)

Are you not claiming that the one who speaks in tongues, speaks to people who hear their own language supernaturally? Yet your proof text says the one who speaks in tongues does NOT speak to people. If this is so, why do you claim there are supernatural hearers? (when God is the one being spoken to)

Just to clear, I don't think the context of 1Cor.14 supports your claim. The comparison is between prophecy and tongues. And more specifically about edifying the body through spiritual gifts. In fact, if what you are claiming is true, there is no need for the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues.

That being said, I do not dismiss the experience you had with this phenomenon. But I think it was the exception, not the rule, as it were. I can't put the Spirit in a box and create limitations for what is possible.

I'm believing that the Word of God is true. Let me ask you your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:2 without referring to Acts 2, seeing as 1 Corinthians was written 15 years before Acts.

 

[Saint Steven]

I'm believing that the Word of God is true. Let me ask you your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:2 without referring to Acts 2, seeing as 1 Corinthians was written 15 years before Acts.

There it is again. ("the God card")
I will not discuss this with you while you continue to put yourself on a pedestal.

What does it say about me when you say this?

CharismaticLady said: ↑
I'm believing that the Word of God is true. Let me ask you your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:2 without referring to Acts 2, seeing as 1 Corinthians was written 15 years before Acts.

 

[CharismaticLady]

There it is again. ("the God card")
I will not discuss this with you while you continue to put yourself on a pedestal.

Me? I put God's word of a pedestal and will not question it. Who am I to change God's word? And who are you?

When you take this verse literally that no man understands, it is much easier to read Acts 2 and see what actually happened without contradicting the Word of God. Try it sometime.

What does it say about you? That you are stuck in a denominational rut.

 

[JAL]

That is not scriptural. 1 Corinthians 14:2 is the rule that all tongues must fit. They are not naturally understood by man.

I agree with this. The gift of tongues always requires the gift of interpretation (for public declarations), in my opinion, because no one understands it. When God manages to convey a message without the aid of an interpreter, it is called prophecy.

In my opinion Acts 2 wasn't the gift of tongues. It was the gift of prophecy. Prophets didn't just prophesy, they sometimes performed signs and wonders as well. In Acts 2, as I understand it, Luke is conveying that a prophet is the perfect evangelist because ONE of those signs and wonders, potentially, is the ability to overcome language barriers supernaturally.

 

[JAL]

I made a slight edit because I also believe in tongues as a private prayer language.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I agree with this. The gift of tongues always requires the gift of interpretation (for public declarations), in my opinion, because no one understands it. When God manages to convey a message without the aid of an interpreter, it is called prophecy.

In my opinion Acts 2 wasn't the gift of tongues. It was the gift of prophecy. Prophets didn't just prophesy, they sometimes performed signs and wonders as well. In Acts 2, as I understand it, Luke is conveying that a prophet is the perfect evangelist because ONE of those signs and wonders, potentially, is the ability to overcome language barriers supernaturally.

I have to disagree with your second paragraph. The devout Jews did not understand the tongues naturally, like with prophecy, as if the disciples were actually speaking their languages. Remember, there were many different languages being heard. So there was no prophecy until Peter spoke by the Spirit and explained that this was the fulfillment of Joel 2. That was the forth-telling aspect to prophecy. What may help your confusion is to see the disciples that were speaking in tongues were speaking languages that no one understood, like 1 Corinthians 14:2 says, and each of the devout Jews HEARD all of them speaking in unison like a choir in their own language - interpretation of tongues. In other words as an example, one heard all of them speaking French, one heard all of them speaking Russian, and another heard all of them speaking English.

 

[JAL]

I have to disagree with your second paragraph. The devout Jews did not understand the tongues naturally, like with prophecy, as if the disciples were actually speaking their languages. Remember, there were many different languages being heard. So there was no prophecy until Peter spoke by the Spirit and explained that this was the fulfillment of Joel 2. That was the forth-telling aspect to prophecy. What may help your confusion is to see the disciples that were speaking in tongues were speaking languages that no one understood, like 1 Corinthians 14:2 says, and each of the devout Jews HEARD all of them speaking in unison like a choir in their own language - interpretation of tongues. In other words as an example, one heard all of them speaking French, one heard all of them speaking Russian, and another heard all of them speaking English.

1Cor 14 expresses a two stage process:
(1) Intitially the tongue is uttered. No one understands what is being said. The speaker prays for an interpretation.
(2) Either the speaker receives the interpretation, or someone else does. That interpretation is then proclaimed.

That didn't happen anywhere in the Book of Acts. Sounds like you're trying to read Paul's gift of tongues into Luke's gift of prophesy. But I haven't been reading your posts so maybe I'm misunderstanding.

So there was no prophecy until Peter spoke by the Spirit and explained that this was the fulfillment of Joel 2.

The devout men heard the disciples speaking languages, understood what was being said, but thought the disciples were drunk. Peter then explained what was heard.

"These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! 16No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel..."

Thus Peter is saying that THOSE UTTERANCES were ALREADY the fulfillment of Joel's promise-of-prophetic-speech. Whereas YOU seem to be claiming that the fulfillment didn't begin until Peter's speech. That completely contradicts the context, it seems to me. In your reading, Peter should have said, "Nevermind what THOSE utterances were all about. Here I am now fulfilling Joel's promise by prophesying to you right now."

The second obvious problem is, Joel promised this, "I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and they SHALL prophesy" (not 'might' prophesy). It is obvious from Acts that:
(1) An outpouring had just fallen on the disciples heads - literally.
(2) Peter is citing this outpouring as the fullfilment of Joel's promised outpouring of the Spirit-of-prophecy.

Your reading seems incredibly unlikely.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

People prophesying in numbers in the native tongues, that is not common for drunkards.

 

[CharismaticLady]

1Cor 14 expresses a two stage process:
(1) Intitially the tongue is uttered. No one understands what is being said. The speaker prays for an interpretation.
(2) Either the speaker receives the interpretation, or someone else does. That interpretation is then proclaimed.

That didn't happen anywhere in the Book of Acts. Sounds like you're trying to read Paul's gift of tongues into Luke's gift of prophesy. But I haven't been reading your posts so maybe I'm misunderstanding.

The devout men heard the disciples speaking languages, understood what was being said, but thought the disciples were drunk. Peter then explained what was heard.

"These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! 16No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel..."

Thus Peter is saying that THOSE UTTERANCES were ALREADY the fulfillment of Joel's promise-of-prophetic-speech. Whereas YOU seem to be claiming that the fulfillment didn't begin until Peter's speech. That completely contradicts the context, it seems to me. In your reading, Peter should have said, "Nevermind what THOSE utterances were all about. Here I am now fulfilling Joel's promise by prophesying to you right now."

The second obvious problem is, Joel promised this, "I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and they SHALL prophesy" (not 'might' prophesy). It is obvious from Acts that:
(1) An outpouring had just fallen on the disciples heads - literally.
(2) Peter is citing this outpouring as the fullfilment of Joel's promised outpouring of the Spirit-of-prophecy.

Your reading seems incredibly unlikely.

1 Corinthians 12 talks of more gifts than just the gift of prophecy.

So you obviously believe that in Acts 2 that by the Spirit the disciples were not speaking in tongues, but were speaking prophecy in all those languages that were being understood. Correct?

Why? Because they were understood and no one understands tongues? But that is easily explained because tongues can be understood by the gift of interpretation of tongues, which the devout Jews were given because of their devoutness to God.

 

[JAL]

1 Corinthians 12 talks of more gifts than just the gift of prophecy.

So you obviously believe that in Acts 2 that by the Spirit the disciples were not speaking in tongues, but were speaking prophecy in all those languages that were being understood. Correct?

Why? Because they were understood and no one understands tongues? But that is easily explained because tongues can be understood by the gift of interpretation of tongues, which the devout Jews were given because of their devoutness to God.

Again, 1Cor 14 describes a 2-stage process. The message is spoke TWICE. The first time, it is in a tongue, which NO ONE understands. The speaker than prays for the gift of interpretation. God answers that prayer by granting the gift of interpretation either to the original speaker or to someone else. THEN the message is spoken a second time, but this time in a language common to the audience.

Acts 2 does not have all these stages. It does not say, "No one understood what was being said the first time". Rather, they understood the message THE FIRST TIME IT WAS SPOKEN. That's how the gift of prophecy works.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Again, 1Cor 14 describes a 2-stage process. The message is spoke TWICE. The first time, it is in a tongue, which NO ONE understands. The speaker than prays for the gift of interpretation. God answers that prayer by granting the gift of interpretation either to the original speaker or to someone else. THEN the message is spoken a second time, but this time in a language common to the audience.

Acts 2 does not have all these stages. It does not say, "No one understood what was being said the first time". Rather, they understood the message THE FIRST TIME IT WAS SPOKEN. That's how the gift of prophecy works.

One thing rarely discerned in 1 Corinthians 14 by the Church and even scholars is that Paul is comparing two different types of speaking in tongues. Either can be supernaturally interpreted, but only one of those MUST be interpreted. The other is not always interpreted because the recipient (God) knows every language already.

There are distinct differences to these two unknown tongues abilities, and that is the direction and the purpose. Plus who receives these abilities.

1.
Mark 16:16-18 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

SIGN This is our prayer and praise language, given to all who believe and are baptized. It is TO God only. As shown in this passage to be absent is no interpretation is mentioned. You may pray for the interpretation but may not always get one. That is up to the Spirit. It may be in intercession for someone else, and God's perfect will for them may not be any of your business. The purpose is for our individual use alone, and not for use inside the church meeting.

2.
1 Corinthians 12:4-11 "4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

1 Corinthians 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts.

GIFT To any who hears someone speaking this tongue, it sounds the same as the prayer language, but the person with this ministry receives knowledge that it is for the whole assembly and without interrupting anyone else will stand and give the tongue. It is a message FROM God and must be interpreted by the person with that ministry. If that person is absent, then the speaker must remain quiet.

The interpretation as seen in 1 Corinthians will be of the following:

1 Corinthians 14:5-6 "
5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification. 6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching?

Interpretation is equal to prophecy.

Because of what was heard said on the Day of Pentecost - "the wonderful works of God" that could be praise, thus the sign of tongues, and the interpretation was sovereignly given. But, then again, because the devout Jews received the interpretation, it could have been the gift of tongues where the interpretation is required.

 

[JAL]

Interpretation is equal to prophecy.

Because of what was heard said on the Day of Pentecost - "the wonderful works of God" that could be praise, thus the sign of tongues, and the interpretation was sovereignly given. But, then again, because the devout Jews received the interpretation, it could have been the gift of tongues where the interpretation is required.

Nope. Not a 2-stage process in Acts. The message wasn't repeated twice. You keep restating your conclusion but that's not resolving the issue.