Speak in Tongues - essential :

[Biblicist]

That is not the dichotomist view. The dichotomist believes that man consists of two parts, a material body and an immaterial spirit/soul (spirit & soul being synonymous). Dichotomy is bipartite not tripartite. The clue is in the prefix. The Holy Spirit doesn't come into the dichotomist/trichotomist debate.

Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith by Wayne Grudem
Another view is called dichotomy. This view teaches that "spirit” is not a separate part of man, but simply another term for "soul” and that both terms are used interchangeably in Scripture to talk about the immaterial part of man, the part that lives on after our bodies die. Therefore, man is made up of two parts (body and soul/spirit). Those who hold this view often agree that Scripture uses the word "spirit” (Heb. riach and Gk. pneuma) more frequently when referring to our relationship to God, but such usage, they say, is not uniform, and the word soul is also used in all the ways that spirit can be used. (However, many people who hold to some kind of dichotomy also affirm that the Bible most often views man as a unity, and that there is much interaction between our material and immaterial parts.)​

​

What a great quote, where I am sure that I have used Grudem's definition myself on this forum some time back; which makes sense as both Grudem and I are in full agreement.

What has obviously thrown you out a bit is with my reference to the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit does not alter the Dichotomist/Trichotomist debate at all; even with my reference to the Spirit this does not alter the positions that are held by the Dichotomist and Trichotomist.

What both perspectives have to decide upon is how the Holy Spirit indwells those who he regenerates, does the Holy Spirit infuse with the human soul (the traditional view) or does he reside alongside the soul (within the body)? As for me, I will take a guess and say that he infuses himself into/with our soul, but of course the Scriptures do not really tell us much about this.

Tell me, where exactly does it say the Holy Spirit prays in tongues? It's not a hard question.

As there have been hundreds of posts that have addressed this for you then I will put this question of yours down to a bit of silliness on your part.

Nonsense. That is a non-sequitur. Just because the Holy Spirit enabled people to pray in tongues, doesn't mean He was the one praying.

Explain this to me.... If the Holy Spirit was the one praying in tongues then how come the Corinthians were able to abuse the gift by speaking in untranslated tongues in their congregation in opposition to the teaching of scripture? Was the Holy Spirit disobeying scripture by speaking when no interpreter was present? Didn't the Spirit know that no interpreter was present, or maybe the Corinthians were forcing Him to pray against His will?

And if you believe that Pentecostals and charismatics have the NT gift, then the Holy Spirit is complicit in sin on a mass scale, as millions of them disobediently speak in church with no interpretation. Is the Holy Spirit a sinner? Impossible.

Simplzzzz. . . Paul has already provided us with the answer to your question in 1 Cor 14 -

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.​

As Paul has told us that we are the ones who choose to give either a word of praise to the Lord in tongues or a prophecy in our native language to the congregation, other than with the prohibition in the Scriptures that we are only to give three tongues and prophecies, then there is nothing else that can stop us from giving a fourth, fifth, sixth tongue or more, though again, it is not something that we are permitted to do.

If someone were to give a fourth or fifth tongue or prophecy it is certainly not a sin though they are certainly failing to show the correct attitude of love to those who may be uninitiated visitors which is something that Paul has hammered in chapter 14.

 

[Waggles]

How truly spoken by Jesus himself ...
The blind shall lead the blind and both shall fall into the pit.

 

[Biblicist]

"It" is the most common because it is the one most easily imitated.

Yep, and I've seen false teaching, false pastoral care, false administrations, false love, false charity and a host of other falsities (if it is a word of course); but none of these things means that teaching, pastoral care, administrations, love and charity are not real.

 

[swordsman1]

Come to think of it, most cessationists tend to only see their 'human' spirit as against that of the Holy Spirit, I think that the malaise is referred to as Spiritmyopia.

And yet again we see pentecostals/charismatics having to resort to more ad hominem insults and name calling, rather than exegetically defending their theology. Their 'fruit' speaks volumes. Arrogance and sarcasm is hardly the sign of people who are 'Spirit filled' as is claimed.

 

[Biblicist]

Seeing as many of those commentaries and articles were published in the 1990's and 2000's you are clearly wrong in saying this interpretation died a death in the 70's (Cottrell - 2007, Thomas - 1998, Houghton - 1996, Woods - 2004, Farnell - 1993, Compton - 2004). The completed canon/maturity view is clearly alive and kicking in academic circles.

Hardcore cessationism is not the only legacy worldview that still runs amok within some academic circles and local congregations, we also have the promotion of homosexuality, the view that Jesus is not the only way to the Father, that God is supposedly dead and a host of others, but none of these things can be rightfully considered to be hallmarks of Christian thought or practice.

As for your complaint that I only provided quotes from commentaries that were written primarily in the 90's and 2000's, it seems that as you have provided no additional commentary beyond that of the first decade of this new century, then let me add in a few more, of course there was only so much room on the single sheet of paper that I first provided:

1 Corinthians, Pheme Perkins (2012) p.155

At the same time, Paul retains a tension between what believers can achieve in this world and the perfection that will be realized when God’s reign is fully realized.​

First and Second Corinthians, John Proctor (2015) p.103

One day Christ will come (15:24). His people will rejoice in his reign and see him “face to face” (13:12). Then the wisdom and perceptions of this age will be overtaken by the clear light of eternity. Tongues, knowledge, and prophecy will not be needed (13:8-10). We shall realize then that the speech, reasoning, and insights of today (13:11-12) – true and proper though they be – have been partial and provisional.​

I will add in a few more first decade quotes as well;

The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Anthony C. Thiselton (2000) pp.1065

Human persons do not simply “progress” to perfection or completion, as gnostics might propose; for the eschatological act of definitive divine judgment which evaluates everything in the light of the whole does away with piece=by-piece knowledge in a cosmic act of God.​

1 & 2 Corinthians, Craig C. Keener (2005) p.110

When Christ would return, no need would remain for gifts spreading a degree of knowledge, for the knowledge of God would be perfect (cf. Jer 31:34; 1QS 4.20- 23).
​

First Corinthians, Fitzmyer (2008) pp. 500-01

Because w. 8b-12b already refer to the eschaton, faith, hope, and love are understood sometimes as remaining forever. . . . . . . . In both cases, the affirmation is eschatological, “remains forever,” i.e., “enduring not only in this age but also in the age to come”​

Still that won't stop you from using plenty of ad hominem derogative cliches such as "hardened", "a dying breed", "last bastion", "flogging a dead horse", "relic of a bygone era" etc in order to try to paint the authors in a bad light.

"Ad hominem cliches", now you certainly have this wrong as I was not attempting to be subtle or indirect with my observations in anyway, they were in fact direct attacks against a worldview that in my opinion amounts to be nothing less than a system of unbelief.

Edit: typo

 

[swordsman1]

As there have been hundreds of posts that have addressed this for you then I will put this question of yours down to a bit of silliness on your part.

Then answer it then, rather than coming back with another ad hominem insult.

Simplzzzz. . . Paul has already provided us with the answer to your question in 1 Cor 14 -

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.

Tell me, what has a passage on prophecy got to do with tongues (or do you believe tongues is prophecy?). Tongues is nowhere mentioned in that passage.

As Paul has told us that we are the ones who choose to give either a word of praise to the Lord in tongues or a prophecy in our native language to the congregation, other than with the prohibition in the Scriptures that we are only to give three tongues and prophecies, then there is nothing else that can stop us from giving a fourth, fifth, sixth tongue or more, though again, it is not something that we are permitted to do.

If someone were to give a fourth or fifth tongue or prophecy it is certainly not a sin though they are certainly failing to show the correct attitude of love to those who may be uninitiated visitors which is something that Paul has hammered in chapter 14.

Paul gave a command: "If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church". Disobedience to scripture is sin. If the Holy Spirit was actively participating in this disobedient tongues speaking that makes Him a sinner.

 

[swordsman1]

As for your complaint that I only provided quotes from commentaries that were written primarily in the 90's and 2000's, it seems that as you have provided no additional commentary beyond that of the first decade of this new century,

You clearly didn't read my post. I was referring to the commentaries I provided, many of which date from the 1990's onwards. The canon/maturity view certainly did not die off in the 70's as your claimed.

then let me add in a few more, of course there was only so much room on the single sheet of paper that I first provided:

1 Corinthians, Pheme Perkins (2012) p.155
At the same time, Paul retains a tension between what believers can achieve in this world and the perfection that will be realized when God’s reign is fully realized.
First and Second Corinthians, John Proctor (2015) p.103
One day Christ will come (15:24). His people will rejoice in his reign and see him “face to face” (13:12). Then the wisdom and perceptions of this age will be overtaken by the clear light of eternity. Tongues, knowledge, and prophecy will not be needed (13:8-10). We shall realize then that the speech, reasoning, and insights of today (13:11-12) – true and proper though they be – have been partial and provisional.
I will add in a few more first decade quotes as well;

The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Anthony C. Thiselton (2000) pp.1065
Human person do not simply “progress” to perfection or completion, as gnostics might propose; for the eschatological act of definitive divine judgment which evaluates everything in the light of the whole does away with piece=by-piece knowledge in a cosmic act of God.
1 & 2 Corinthians, Craig C. Keener (2005) p.110
When Christ would return, no need would remain for gifts spreading a degree of knowledge, for the knowledge of God would be perfect (cf. Jer 31:34; 1QS 4.20- 23).
First Corinthians, Fitzmyer (2008) pp. 500-01
Because w. 8b-12b already refer to the eschaton, faith, hope, and love are understood sometimes as remaining forever. . . . . . . . In both cases, the affirmation is eschatological, “remains forever,” i.e., “enduring not only in this age but also in the age to come”

Yet more one sentence commentaries on this passage. Wow. And again little in the way explanations apart from obvious schoolboy errors such as "and see him “face to face” (13:12)."

 

[Biblicist]

Tell me, what has a passage on prophecy got to do with tongues (or do you believe tongues is prophecy?). Tongues is nowhere mentioned in that passage.

Contrary to populist Pentecostal belief, tongues cannot be used to provide a prophecy to a congregation, where some say that tongues + interpretation = prophecy. But of course my inclusion of both tongues and prophecy should have been obvious, where both are limited to 3 occurrences, where we have 3 + 3.

Paul gave a command: "If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church". Disobedience to scripture is sin. If the Holy Spirit was actively participating in this disobedient tongues speaking that makes Him a sinner.

For those who do not understand the things of the Spirit, then I suppose your reasoning would make sense but for those who understand what the Scriptures say and who have experienced the the Spirit speaking through them in either tongues or prophecy then it all makes sense.

Even though Paul (the Scriptures) strictly and overtly forbid the uninterpreted use of tongues within the congregational meeting, when this does occur it can still be a wonderful experience knowing that upwards of a thousand or five thousand tongues are offering praise to their Father in the Spirit, but of course it is still inappropriate as there may be unitiated visitors such as those who are unsaved or who enter in as unitiated cessationists who will probably say that "we are mad", which to the flesh in my view actually makes sense.

It's too bad that Paul did not add in a proviso that if we place a sign on the outside doors to our meetings that said "CAUTION - Enter at own risk, the Holy Spirit is at work" that we could then all offer our individual praise to the Father, but as this is not the case, where we are instead to worship the Father in unison and as an edified community then we cannot.

Edit:typo...ugghh

 

[swordsman1]

Even though Paul (the Scriptures) strictly and overtly forbid the uninterpreted use of tongues within the congregational meeting, when this does occur it can be a wonderful experience knowing that upwards of a thousand or five thousand tongues are offering praise to their Father in the Spirit, but of course it is still inappropriate as their may be unitiated visitors such as those who are unsaved or who enter in as unitiated cessationists who will probably say that "we are mad", which to the flesh in my actually view makes sense.

It's too bad that Paul did not add in a proviso that if we place a sign on the outside doors to our meetings that said "CAUTION - Enter at own risk, the Holy Spirit is at work" that we could then all offer our individual praise to the Father, but as this is not the case, where we are instead to worship the Father in unison and as an edified community then we cannot.

So what was the Holy Spirit thinking when He was praying in tongues in disobedience to scripture?

 

[Biblicist]

You clearly didn't read my post. I was referring to the commentaries I provided, many of which date from the 1990's onwards. The canon/maturity view certainly did not die off in the 70's as your claimed.

Your correct in that this old worldview has not died off, at least not completely, but where it was once a part of the old bastion of cessationism, it now belongs not to a bastion but to a fort that is in tatters. In all honesty, I really doubt that any of the commentators that you quoted actually believe what they have put in print.

Yet more one sentence commentaries on this passage. Wow. And again little in the way explanations apart from obvious schoolboy errors such as "and see him “face to face” (13:12)."

Guess what, when someone provides a single page sample list of some of the most renowned scholars of our day, who are either cessastionst/open-but-cautious/Pentecostal or Charismatic and with page numbers, then you are expected to go and do the work to check up on the material, that's the way things are done - I really cannot hold your hand on this process.

Of course, the actual quotes mean little as the point of the exercise was to point out that most serious scholars of the late 70's and onwards have rejected the idea that 1Cor 13:10 is speaking about anything but the establishment of God's future Kingdom on earth.

 

[Biblicist]

So what was the Holy Spirit thinking when He was praying in tongues in disobedience to scripture?

That's a very good question; let's see, what does the Holy Spirit think when he is offering words of praise and adoration to the Father through one of God's children?

 

[swordsman1]

Contrary to populist Pentecostal belief, tongues cannot be used to provide a prophecy to a congregation, where some say that tongues + interpretation = prophecy.

So all the millions of times that Pentecostals have been giving interpretations of tongues as a message from God to their congregation they were obviously faking the message, right?

 

[Biblicist]

So all the millions of times that Pentecostals have been giving interpretations of tongues as a message from God to their congregation they were obviously faking the message, right?

Well lets see, the word 'faking' implies that they were intentionally providing a false word, though this can certainly happen at times, but every time someone provides a word to the congregation in tongues as in tongue + interpretation = a prophecy then such things are still being given in the flesh even when they are doing so unintentionally.

Even though I am more than content to hammer away at the cessationist worldview, we Pentecostals and Charismatics still have our flaws and quirks; though many Full Gospel congregations are aware of this where they will not allow such things to occur.

To my embarrassment, I used to believe that tongues + interpretation = prophecy not so long ago myself, and while I was a CF member.

 

[swordsman1]

Well lets see, the word 'faking' implies that they were intentionally providing a false word, though this can certainly happen at times, but every time someone provides a word to the congregation in tongues as in tongue + interpretation = a prophecy then such things are still being given in the flesh even when they are doing so unintentionally.

Even though I am more than content to hammer away at the cessationist worldview, we Pentecostals and Charismatics still have our flaws and quirks; though many Full Gospel congregations are aware of this where they will not allow such things to occur.

To my embarrassment, I used to believe that tongues + interpretation = prophecy not so long ago myself, and while I was a CF member.

If the interpretation was wrong (over and over and over again) then clearly they don't have gift of interpretation. 100% of the prophecies they gave to the congregation were false. You know what that makes them.

 

[Biblicist]

If the interpretation was wrong (over and over and over again) clearly they don't have gift of interpretation. The prophecies they gave to the congregation were repeatly false. You know what that makes them.

This is undoubtedly a very real and serious problem which if left unchecked can allow many of us to fall prey to our fleshly and carnal whims.

The problem that we all face, no matter if we are Continuist, cessationist or a callithumpian is that we can all too easily convince ourselves that we 'need' to do something that others within our worldview are not providing; for the Pentecostal this could be when we believe that if a word in tongues is not forthcoming within a meeting that we should be the ones who then do so.

Now we should expect that as we can all read the Scriptures for ourselves, where Paul goes to some length to say that tongues are ALWAYS AND WITHOUT EXCEPTION directed to the Father and never to man, then it should be as simple as this but we humans can all too easily succumb to what is called reception theory, where we each uncritically 'go-with-the-flow' and therefore receive our understanding of an issue through peer-pressure.

 

[swordsman1]

This is undoubtedly a very real and serious problem which if left unchecked can allow many of us to fall prey to our fleshly and carnal whims.

The problem that we all face, no matter if we are Continuist, cessationist or a callithumpian is that we can all too easily convince ourselves that we 'need' to do something that others within our worldview are not providing; for the Pentecostal this could be when we believe that if a word in tongues is not forthcoming within a meeting that we should be the ones who then do so.

Now we should expect that as we can all read the Scriptures for ourselves, where Paul goes to some length to say that tongues are ALWAYS AND WITHOUT EXCEPTION directed to the Father and never to man, then it should be as simple as this but we humans can all too easily succumb to what is called reception theory, where we each uncritically 'go-with-the-flow' and therefore receive our understanding of an issue through peer-pressure.

Seeing it is then proven that Pentecostal and charismatic churches are full of such false prophecies, it seems Jesus's words are now becoming true. We must be near the End.

"and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect."

"At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people."​

 

[Biblicist]

Seeing it is then proven that Pentecostal and charismatic churches are full of such false prophecies, it seems Jesus's words are now becoming true. We must be near the End.

"and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect."

"At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people."​

No, this passage is addressing those individuals, who could certainly claim to be Christians but who are just as likely to be humanists/witches/sorcerers or even the anti-christ.

The cessationist is at least on safe ground here as no one would ever expect to see either the Power of God (signs & wonders) or the Manifestations of the Holy Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) being active in such circles, so you are on pretty safe ground in this aspect if even by accident or by wilful omission.

The issue is certainly complex in that most of us tend to follow the dynamics of whatever group that we are in where few seem to really sit down and think through their theological beliefs, which for the Pentecostal and Charismatic can certainly be problematic as our experiential faith moves out of the more cloistered and sedate cessationist worldview where our actions not only touch on the realm of spiritual powers but they can dramatically effect many if we do not get things right.

 

[Albion]

Yes, it can be imitated. I've seen it and can tell the false from the real. For that matter, Christianity can be imitated, but there again you can tell those with faith from those who don't.

Alas, it seems as though the mere suggestion from a Christian of another tradition saying that Mr. X isn't really speaking in tongues--perhaps some TV preacher who throws a "Kala mala lama haka" into the middle of a sentence--is met by Pentecostal Christians with a denunciation as though HE, the observer, must be the one who doesn't have faith for having doubted.

 

[Albion]

Yep, and I've seen false teaching, false pastoral care, false administrations, false love, false charity and a host of other falsities (if it is a word of course); but none of these things means that teaching, pastoral care, administrations, love and charity are not real.

But we are not discussing false charity or false administrations. We're talking about the gifts of the Holy Spirit as enumerated in the New Testament.

 

[swordsman1]

Guess what, when someone provides a single page sample list of some of the most renowned scholars of our day, who are either cessastionst/open-but-cautious/Pentecostal or Charismatic and with page numbers, then you are expected to go and do the work to check up on the material, that's the way things are done - I really cannot hold your hand on this process.

So unless people go out and buy the books you cite (and some of them are very expensive), we are not to know the exegetical reasons those commentators provide to support their views. Instead we must simply take your word that their evidence is good without knowing what on earth it is.

If any further evidence is provided I expect it is the same old debunked notions that have been offered before by continuists. Eg, that "face to face" is referring to seeing Christ; the word "perfect" that some translations use; etc.