6. Conclusion
I would summarize our discussion on tongues in four points:
1. The New Testament can speak of both the tongues of "humans and angels." In other words, the NT affirms the existence of tongues that do not involve the mind and that are not human languages. At least in Acts 2, the tongues in question seem to be what we call xenoglossia, speaking in foreign languages that have not been learned (they are a witness to unbelievers). 1 Corinthians 14 seems to be regular glossolalia (they turn off unbelievers).
2. The New Testament does not teach that you must speak in tongues to be a Christian. Paul flatly says, "Do all speak in tongues? (No)." He makes no distinction between tongues as evidence of the Spirit and tongues as a spiritual gift. The word for speak is the same in both Acts 2 and this comment in 1 Corinthians 12.
3. Some Christians have the gift of tongues, understood as non-human languages that do not involve the mind. Paul says not to forbid this gift. He means in Corinthian worship. I believe it is appropriate for some groups to apply it today as don't forbid exercise of this gift in private. Paul himself may very well have had this gift.
4. Paul does not wish tongues to be a hindrance in worship. At Corinth he reined in the use of tongues in worship. He forbid it unless there was an interpretation and even then only two or three one at a time. With the variety of Christian denominations today, I see this principle playing out in more than one way. There are communities of faith where uninterpreted tongues does not seem to be a hindrance to edification in any way. There are others where any exercise of tongues in worship would create massive disruption and possible schism. Let each group do whatever they do to the glory of God.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
One nuggett that I remember from Bible School is that we must be careful not to base our theology upon historical literature such as Acts. Corinthians however is a different matter, being epistolary in nature.
Why base it on the entire book when one could base their theology on one chapter? I PICK CHAPTER TWO!
Just kidding. As the word verification says, "famunk."
I think I should get a link on your page too--something like, Stephanie Immordino: life without a holy profession.
But ... in every instance in the Bible where I voice is heard from Heaven, isn't it in Hebrew?
Therefore, isn't Hebrew the "language of Heaven"?
Ken,
I've read this whole series and also copied off the text into a word file to save on my computer for later reference (since it's not yet on your archive site and I bet won't be until long after you've finished grading this semester).
It was phenomenally helpful for me and a great future resource in discussing this with many people in my Wesleyan church who speak in tongues (and want to know how to behave/believe in regards to it). It's also helpful in my small group and close circle of friends, which includes many wesleyan tongues-speakers. As a DBMD member I will also use it as a source for future ministers struggling with what a "good Wesleyan" should do about "the tongues issue."
Thanks for being a voice of theological depth and textual clarity for us here, Ken.
-David
Post a Comment