Speaking in Tongues a Cessationists’ View

[Dave L]

We see the Spirit already active in Genesis chapter one. Born again doesn't appear until John chapter three. The new testament refers to it as THIS faith to differentiate from faith in general. The same is true of grace, compared to "grace already given". See below.

Galatians 3:23-25
Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed.
24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith.
25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

John 1:16-17
Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given.
17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Born again = circumcision of the heart. Abraham believed = had the Holy Spirit.

 

[Dave L]

I will restate some previously unanswered question to make them clearer.

When or how does this new birth occur? Does it require the person to do anything?

What relationship does getting the new birth have to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

God imparts the new birth to those Christ redeemed on the cross. He justified them by his blood.
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” (Acts 20:28)


“But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.” (Romans 5:8–9)

 

[Anto9us]

Mal'ak said:
"But I do agree Dave that people do the tongues for the "high", which it is, if you ask them it is physically pleasing and overwhelming. It is more relatable to sex then to Holy works, because that is all it is. People seek this "pleasure", and by doing so they are inviting evil spirits to enter them."

Whoah, man!
That is BEYOND CESSATIONISM -- that is outright accusing charismatics of "doing tongues for the high" -- classing it a physical pleasure more related to sex than something Holy. Charismatics as a class are deemed pleasure seekers and "inviting evil spirits to enter them"

 

[swordsman1]

We see tongues can be understood by the hearer but not speaker Acts 2, tongues can be angelic languages 1 Cor 13 and tongues can be only a language understood by God 1 Cor 14.

The tongues of angels in 1 Cor 13 was Paul portraying an exaggerated scenario to make a point. He is saying even if someone could speak in tongues to the ultimate degree conceivable (speaking the language of angels), but not have love, it would be worthless. We can tell this because he does the same with 3 other gifts in the following verses - having the gift of prophesy to the ultimate degree of knowing ALL mysteries and ALL knowledge (ie. omniscience); having the gift of faith to the ultimate degree of moving mountains; and having the gift of giving to the ultimate degree of giving up ALL you possess to the poor and even giving up your own life. Paul is saying that even if someone had those gifts to such a superlative degree, without love, it would be to no avail.

No one actually spoke in the language of angels. The only description of tongues in scripture is in Acts 2, miraculously speaking known foreign languages.

 

[swordsman1]

The "perfect" has not come yet.

That depends on your interpretation of what "the perfect" or "completeness" (as the NIV and others better translate it) is.

Although Tongues may be faked today by some, the genuine is still among us. Just as their is such a thing as counterfeit money, but that does not make real currency invalid.

I would say all that is claimed to be tongues today is counterfeit. I don't see any matching the only description of the gift in scripture (Acts 2) that being known foreign languages.

 

[swordsman1]

1Co 13:8
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
1Co 13:9
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
1Co 13:10
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
1Co 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
1Co 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

So "the perfect" in 13:10 relates to the FACE TO FACE and KNOWING FULLY that Paul would know at some time in the future. That face to face knowing was surely not the completion of the New Testament canon. There is no justification whatsoever in saying the penning of the New Testament is what is talked about in this passage. WE are STILL in the NOW of seeing through a glass darkly -- we STILL look forward to a "THEN" when we see face to face and know fully. As John said

1Jo 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Why 1 Cor 13:10 should be translated 'completeness' (as per NIV etc) and not 'the perfect':

Any lexicon will tell you that 'teleios' can mean perfect, mature, or complete. When a word has multiple meanings we have to look at the context to decide which is the correct translation and it becomes obvious ‘completeness’ is the better word for the following reasons:

• It is clear ‘ek merous’ (in part) and ‘teleios’ (completeness or the perfect) are in antithesis with each other. If it is translated as ‘the perfect’ you are awkwardly pitting a quantitative concept (in part) against a qualitative concept (perfect). If it is translated ‘completeness’ there is no such tension.
  
  
• The equivalent antithesis pair in v12 (‘in part’ and ‘fully’) are both quantitative.
  
  
• It makes far better grammatical sense - the incomplete will be replaced by the complete.
  
  
• Paul's other use of the word teleios in his epistles overwhelmingly relate to completing/developing/maturing rather than perfecting (1 Cor 2:6, 1 Cor 14:20, Phil 3:15, Eph 4:13, Col 1:28, Col 4:12, Heb 5:14), making it more likely that the same applies here.
  
  
• Throughout scripture and Greek literature when teleios is used in proximity to nēpiois (child), as in v14, it invariably means developing into an adult. See 1 Cor 14:20, Eph. 4:13-14, Heb. 5:13-4

Many bible versions such as the NIV have realised this and have changed their translations from "the perfect" to "completeness". About a third of bibles now have ‘completeness’ (or similar wording) in their translations and I suspect more and more translation committees will likewise follow suit in their future editions.

Why 'completeness' cannot be the 2nd coming of Christ, but rather the completion and distribution of the Canon:

• In scripture teleios is never used to describe heaven, Christ's return, or anything eschatological. It is however used to describe scripture in James 1:25

• The analogy of a child maturing into a man in v11 indicates that the process would not be an instantaneous one (as would happen at the 2nd coming) but rather something that occurs over a period of time - such as the completed canon being distributed among the churches. This ties in perfectly with church history where the early church fathers (100-200AD) said tongues were still active, the middle fathers (200-300 AD) saying they are rare, and the late fathers (300-400AD) saying the gift had ceased.
  
  
• In v13 it says that faith hope and love would remain after the 3 gifts had ceased. The greatest is love because love never ceases (v8), but faith and hope cease at the 2nd coming when they become reality: Heb 11:1 "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."; 2 Cor 5:6-7 "while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord - for we walk by faith, not by sight"; Rom 8:24 "but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees?". So if faith and hope cease at the 2nd coming and outlast the 3 gifts then the 3 gifts must cease before the 2nd coming.
  
  
• If Paul was referring to the 2nd coming, then it wouldn't just be prophecy, words of knowledge, and tongues that will cease. All the spiritual gifts will cease. In the eternal state there will be no need for healers, pastors, teachers, evangelists, giving, faith, discernment of spirits, etc. Yet Paul makes no mention of those ceasing. 'Face to face' in v12 is not referring to seeing Christ as continuationists suppose. There is no mention of Christ in this passage. 'Face to face' is referring to the analogy of a mirror. At the time of Paul's writing, when church had to rely on piecemeal prophecies for guidance in the faith in the absence of the NT, it was like seeing dimly in a poor mirror (mirrors were poor quality in those days). But when 'completeness' came, it would be like looking at someone 'face to face'. Prophecies would cease and we would have God's revelation to man presented in a far superior way.
  
  
• “Completeness” is the antithesis of “in part”, so it is obvious these two quantitative expressions are related. Whatever ‘in part’ is referring to, almost certainly applies to ‘completeness’. That which is ‘in part’ is the practice of the gifts of prophecy and words of knowledge (v9), both of which are revelations from God. It follows therefore that ‘completeness’ would also involve revelation. “In part” refers to the fact that the revelation communicated by these gifts was partial or piecemeal. The corresponding “completeness”, as the counterpart to “in part” must then refer to a full or complete revelation from God. This can only be seen as the completed revelation God as preserved in the New Testament. At the time of Paul's writing the early church needed prophecy and words of knowledge to guide them in the faith in the absence of a New Testament. However when a church had a completed canon, it would no longer need the gift of prophecy to guide them. Thus, the completed canon would replace the partial prophecies and words of knowledge.
  
  
• This interpretation is corroborated elsewhere in scripture, notably in Eph 2:20 which says that apostles and prophets were only for the foundation of the church. Few people deny that apostles ceased after the founding the church and this verse undeniably says the same applies to prophets.
  
  
• And of course history confirms this interpretation. Tongues etc did indeed cease shortly after the apostolic age.

And for the record, I don't say it is the completed canon itself that brought about the cessation of the revelatory gifts. It was their distribution and the subsequent maturity of the church that ensued. That process is not something that be expressed in a single word, which is why Paul uses the adjective telious (completeness/maturity) without an accompanying noun. It he was referring to Christ, his return, heaven, or eternity he would have used the appropriate Greek noun for those things.

 

[Anto9us]

That Paul may have been speaking hypothetically about "tongues of men and of angels" is possible -- what is NOT possible is that Acts 2 is the only instance of Tongues in the New Testament:

Mar 16:17
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Act 2:3
And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Act 2:11
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.


Act 10:44
While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45
And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 10:46
For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Act 10:47
Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Act 19:6
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

1Co 12:10
To 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:

1Co 12:28
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1Co 12:30
Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

1Co 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

1Co 13:8
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

1Co 14:5
I 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.
1Co 14:6
Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

1Co 14:18
I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

1Co 14:22
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
1Co 14:23
If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

1Co 14:39
Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

 

[Anto9us]

And of course history confirms this interpretation. Tongues etc did indeed cease shortly after the apostolic age.

Tongues have indeed NOT CEASED. People do indeed speak in Tongues today.

 

[Anto9us]

So we see NUMEROUS evidence of Tongues AFTER Chapter two of Acts, in chapters 10 and 19, and of course many times in Corinthians Paul speaks of Tongues.

 

[swordsman1]

That Paul may have been speaking hypothetically about "tongues of men and of angels" is possible -- what is NOT possible is that Acts 2 is the only instance of Tongues in the New Testament:

Mar 16:17
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Act 2:3
And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Act 2:11
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.


Act 10:44
While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45
And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 10:46
For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Act 10:47
Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Act 19:6
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

1Co 12:10
To 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:

1Co 12:28
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1Co 12:30
Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

1Co 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

1Co 13:8
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

1Co 14:5
I 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.
1Co 14:6
Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

1Co 14:18
I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

1Co 14:22
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
1Co 14:23
If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

1Co 14:39
Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

None of those verses give us a new definition of tongues that extends or replaces the Acts 2 description.

 

[Dave L]

Tongues have indeed NOT CEASED. People do indeed speak in Tongues today.

They only think they do.

http://www.dana.org/News/Speaking_in_Tongues__Glossalalia_and_Stress_Reduction/

 

[Anto9us]

Now -- is there anyone still claiming that ACTS 2 is the only evidence of Tongues in the New Testament?

Is there any who claims people just speak in tongues for a "high" and invite demons into their life by doing so?

Speak up - English is Okay - it need not be posted in Tongues.

 

[Dave L]

Now -- is there anyone still claiming that ACTS 2 is the only evidence of Tongues in the New Testament?

Is there any who claims people just speak in tongues for a "high" and invite demons into their life by doing so?

Speak up - English is Okay - it need not be posted in Tongues.

Tongues also mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12 - 14, with more detail.

 

[Anto9us]

So, Dave L - you say I only think I speak in Tongues? Do you say, like Mal'ak, that I along with all charismatics only do this for a "high" that it is a fleshly pleasure to be likened unto sex? That I am inviting demons into my life by praying in the Holy Spirit?

This is incredible -- there are not only entire denominations which use Tongues, but many within all denominations are charismatic -- there are Charismatic Episcopal churches (I used to attend one) there are charismatic Catholic services I have attended.

 

[swordsman1]

Tongues have indeed NOT CEASED. People do indeed speak in Tongues today.

What people do today is not speaking in tongues as scripture describes it, but rather they have discovered the natural phenomenon of the flesh known to linguists as free vocalization or glossolalia, where the human speech organs go into 'autopilot' and produce strings of random syllables. The phenomenon has been well studied and found to be fundamentally not a language. Neither is it unique to Christianity. The idea of tongues being a non-human, unintelligible language has only been taught in the church since the beginning of the 20th Century. Before then it was pretty much universally agreed that tongues was miraculously speaking foreign human languages - from the time of the church fathers (immediately after the apostolic age) onwards.

 

[Dave L]

So, Dave L - you say I only think I speak in Tongues? Do you say, like Mal'ak, that I along with all charismatics only do this for a "high" that it is a fleshly pleasure to be likened unto sex? That I am inviting demons into my life by praying in the Holy Spirit?

This is incredible -- there are not only entire denominations which use Tongues, but many within all denominations are charismatic -- there are Charismatic Episcopal churches (I used to attend one) there are charismatic Catholic services I have attended.

Paul said they would cease when the perfect came. Do you think the bible is perfect?

 

[Anto9us]

From the gibberish about glossalalia as stress reduction:

" But Lynn and others theorize that a proclivity for glossolalia may involve variability in dopaminergic genes believed to also mediate susceptibility to hypnosis. "

 

[Hawkins]

Unlike Acts, Paul's letter to the church in Corinth is to deal with problematic issues, including the practice of an unknown tongue. In KJV this is described as an unknown tongue instead of tongues as in Acts. No one knows what it is. Paul's final instruction is that in the absence of an interpreter, this should be kept private.

1 Corinthians 14:27-28 (NIV2011)
If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.
If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

 

[Dave L]

Unlike Acts, Paul's letter to the church in Corinth is to deal with problematic issues, including the practice of an unknown tongue. In KJV this is described as an unknown tongue instead of tongues as in Acts. No one knows what it is. Paul's final instruction is that in the absence of an interpreter, this should be kept private.

They are the same. Tongues are known only to God and those with the gift of interpretation.
1 Corinthians 14:2

 

[Hawkins]

They are the same. Tongues are known only to God and those with the gift of interpretation.
1 Corinthians 14:2

No. No one ever confirmed Corinthians actually spoke in tongue, due to the lack of an interpreter.

If you don't follow Paul's instruction on this, you don't follow God.