I was going to leave this alone, and go my merry way; but the tone I perceived in the last sentence wouldn't let me.
Exactly! Why would Paul need to rebuke them if they had the proper manifestation of the gift!The Holy Spirit gives the utterance.
If tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, why would he manifest different through tongues in the book of Acts?
1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.Tongues is for a sign, what sign is it for? ...and if you say it was JUST for the Jews, then I ask "Don't we still have Jews today?"
When you're not married any more.My wedding ring is a sign to the world that I am married. When do I need to throw my wedding ring away?
Who said that an unbeliever could manifest the Holy Spirit?Tongues was a sign that the Holy Spirit was poured out on the Day of Pentecost.
HE was poured out and here today! He was given to the church, so an unbeliever can not manifest the Holy Spirit.
You're talking in circles. My point was, and always has been, that tongues are a sign for unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22); that Paul taught that our primary purpose should be edification of others and ourselves (1 Cor 14:5, 12, 15, 19, 26).If it was a language that I know, then an unbeliever can do that!
And I'm sorry you only understand the way you do, using a rebuke to justify a doctrine.Sorry, you only understand the way you do... so that you can explain away the manifestations!