Thank you for the kind response. I am probably the last guy alive that would despise anyone thinking that speaking in tongues have ceased. There may be hints of that in scripture, but I am sure there is ample evidence that the operation of tongues were demonstrated prominently in the day of the Apostles and some thereafter, representing a slow down if nothing else. The slowdown would seem plausible, as the work of the church continued to build a foundation and substantiate the true cornerstone in Christ. Therefore tongues would someday cease, especially at the return of our Savior.

I completely agree with you that the doctrine of Christ and the gospel was building through prophesy in the church. The gift of prophesy did not only follow tongues, but was a gift used for the very purpose you espouse, declaring the works of the Lord in inspired consistency as the church is gathered. This same thing goes on today as the Word of God is proclaimed by the gifted preachers and teachers in the church for her edification.

Thanks to both you and Tim,

Blessings,
Chris

Which position of Tim’s are you referring? ( I may not have characterized this properly for Tim. )

1. That tongues are required by scripture to cease?
2. That a portion of the written word of God is a result of tongues?

One or both or neither? Or was there another position?

Thanks,
Chris

One other thing about “Tongues” and then I will step back into my cave. I believe you will find it difficult and possible dangerous to support the notion that glossolalia is the revealer of the actual words of scripture when it is not corroborated by the actual words of scripture, whether connected to the OT (i.e. demonstrated by the OT prophecy, Isaiah, Joel, Ezekiel, etc) or expressed by the writer of the NT text. Please let me know if you can find any direct corroborating evidence to “tongues” being used in this manner.

I would argue that the actual words of the scriptures were already provided so that “tongues” are understood as the sign that God provided. Prophesy makes the sign known and understandable concerning Christ. This is the main concern for the “private prayer language” phenomenon advocate and was Paul’s corrective stance at Corinth.

So as Paul has concluded,…if “tongues” were not in the context of instruction to the work of the church concerning Christ and the gospel, then they would not be classified as “tongues”.

1 Corinthians 14:27-33

Paul would go onto say “if anyone” (I think that includes anyone), and then he adds a little phrase if there are no interpreters “keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.” Paul is certainly not advocating running into a prayer closet and speaking to yourself and to God. We would understand this better today as …if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church;….so “be quiet” or “just shut up”. This flows into the next section with the same instruction to women because of similar abuse.

Fascinating subject….I’m afraid I am way beyond Dr. Allen’s take on Hebrews 2.

Blessings,
Chris

Sorry for the late response, I was busy coaching a High School Basketball City League team in our February Madness tourney in Nashville. We won 93-80, ….one more game to the finals! But here’s my response to your gracious response earlier.

Again, I see your point of basis for how tongues were operating or more appropriately “not operating” in the midst of the Corinthian church. It is possible to be even more harsh toward the expression of tongues as legitimate at all, based upon the “noisy gong and clanging cymbal”….which is really just noise not even necessarily content, whether interpreted or not as in this case being compared and referenced to love…..along with the condition of the church on a host of other problems.

The main point I was trying to make, is that edification of the body is “one thing” as Christ is proclaimed and the Gospel is corroborated through this sign provided by the Spirit. “Revelation”, on the other hand (other than what was being revealed in Christ concerning the Gospel) coming as a result of tongues is a whole “other” endeavor that would need to be substantiated by evidence somewhere within the letters. For instance, if Paul would have interpreted someone speaking in a tongue or wrote down as he was listening and disclosed this into scripture, we would have our evidence, but I just have not found that type of connection. Most of the letters were written from prison or on the road and sent to these churches. So it is very unlikely that the sign gift would be a factor in the writing. There is a dominant connection and point of evidence we receive from Joel and Isaiah concerning Christ and the Gospel, which is corroborated by Luke and Paul in their letters concerning God’s signature of His Son through tongues. This seems to be a more sure way of interpretation.

This then flows into how Hebrews is interpreted as well. Even though there is not a sure fire author identified (maybe Dr. Allen can close the gap), there is proof positive that the writer was depending upon the OT Word of God to substantiate the claims.

Hebrews 2:3-8 “how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, (4) God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will. (5) For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking. (6) But one has testified somewhere, saying, “WHAT IS MAN, THAT YOU REMEMBER HIM? OR THE SON OF MAN, THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HIM? (7) “YOU HAVE MADE HIM FOR A LITTLE WHILE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS; YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR, AND HAVE APPOINTED HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; (8) YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET.” For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.”

This salvation is not able to be neglected because the Lord spoke it, being confirmed to the church by eye witnesses, the Spirit giving testimony by signs and wonders according to Him, and it could not be refuted by unbelievers.

Ultimately the Hebrew author argues from the OT Davidic foundation, lifting Christ higher than the angels and above all! It is a bit tenuous to get cessation of God’s signature from the author’s argument which demands the exalting of His Son.

I will have to stick with Paul’s directive for tongues, even in the midst of correction.….1 Corinthians 14:21-22 “In the Law it is written, “BY MEN OF STRANGE TONGUES AND BY THE LIPS OF STRANGERS I WILL SPEAK TO THIS PEOPLE, AND EVEN SO THEY WILL NOT LISTEN TO ME,” says the Lord. (22) So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.”

Blessings,
Chris

This is not speaking of spiritual gifts, but of angels who miraculously and truthfully foretold Christ. This cannot be used to refute PPL, or even Charismatics. It is totally taking the passage out of its original meaning and context. That can be serious Tim. It is also a wrong way to preach the Bible, yet I realize it is a common way. It’s why so many in our pews are Bible illiterate, in my opinion. I truly mean no disrespect to Dr. Allen nor you, but wrong exegeses is wrong exegeses.

I agree, Robin is on something alright. :>)

Blessings,
Tim

Here is the basis of my argument. 1 Corinthians 14:1-4 says; 1 Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. 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. 3 But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.

Paul is speaking about edifying the church and speaking in a language without the interpretation does not edify the church. The prophecy gift is one where God speaks through the speaker. The tongues, uninterpreted, is a gift that the speaker uses to speak to God. Paul instructed them in public worship to have interpretation because it would then be beneficial for the entire church, thus in effect making it prophetic. I like the way the Bible Knowledge Commentary explains it; The context of this verse is the assembled congregation in Corinth (1 Cor. 11:2-14:40, esp. 14:4-5) in which utterance in a tongue was given without the benefit of interpretation (cf. vv. 13, 19). Apparently no native speaker of the tongue was present in the assembly (cf. vv. 10-11), and no one was given supernatural enablement to interpret it. The utterances therefore were mysteries, truths requiring a supernatural disclosure which God had not provided the Corinthians in this particular instance. As a result, the expression of tongues became an exercise in futility for the assembly as a whole, with only the speaker deriving some benefit (v. 4) in his spirit (cf. v. 14), the sentient aspect of his being (pneuma; cf. Matt. 5:3; Acts 17:16; 2 Cor. 2:13).
14:3. One with the gift of prophecy (cf. 12:10), on the other hand, spoke in the tongue of his listeners, in this case Greek, and edified them by proclaiming God’s Word in such a way that it gave them strengthening, (oikodomēn, “edification”), encouragement, (paraklēsin), and comfort (paramythian, “consolation,” used only here in the NT).
—Bible Knowledge Commentary

Blessings,
Tim