1st Cor 13:10

[webdog]

Hi MB!

Well, it would have to be that they've ceased, even if you don't believe the exposition I've presented, else the tongues-speaking churches wouldn't send their missionaries to language school.

You said -



Very true, but I think that this is a secondary theme in this section, at best.

I say this because Chapters 12, 13, & 14 are part of one continuous thought - it's easy to get the idea that you and others are proposing if you don't realize this and read Chapter 13 all by itself.

BUT - when you take into account the context, you realize that he's really hammering them for acting like they're superior to others in the church - they're not demonstrating love. That's why Chapter 13 is there - to show them that, even though they had ALL the spiritual gifts (I Cor. 1:7), if they didn't use them under the control of the Holy Spirit, they were a big zero.

So - the main theme of these chapters is the abuse by the members of the Church in Corinth of their spiritual gifts, and one of the ways this was manifested is how they were treating one another. However, that's not the main theme, only a secondary one (another secondary theme is their abuse of the Lord's Supper).

Does that help?

Hope so!

How can love be secondary...when the entire chapter is devoted to just that? I agree it is sandwiched between two chapters speaking of the gifts of the church, but the main theme of the chapter is love, not gifts.

 

[Todd W. White]

Well, maybe I should have said ancillary, or adjacent, or tangential, or something other than secondary.

Yes, Chapter 13 is The Great Love Chapter, but, in the context of the entire section, it's not THE main theme - the Corinthians' lack of God's kind of love for their fellow Christians may have been the #1 evidence they were carnal, and not spiritual, but the reason they didn't exhibit it was because they were coveting what they thought were the "best" gifts, and this led to a lack of love for others.

Hope I'm making sense here - I'm not trying to minimize the idea of God's love working in and through us, I'm just trying to show how messed up the Corinthians really were.

And, incidentally, if you take the Church in Corinth and overlay it over Christianity today, you'll find very little differences...

 

[MB]

Hi MB!

Well, it would have to be that they've ceased, even if you don't believe the exposition I've presented, else the tongues-speaking churches wouldn't send their missionaries to language school.
Very true, but I think that this is a secondary theme in this section, at best.

I say this because Chapters 12, 13, & 14 are part of one continuous thought - it's easy to get the idea that you and others are proposing if you don't realize this and read Chapter 13 all by itself.

BUT - when you take into account the context, you realize that he's really hammering them for acting like they're superior to others in the church - they're not demonstrating love. That's why Chapter 13 is there - to show them that, even though they had ALL the spiritual gifts (I Cor. 1:7), if they didn't use them under the control of the Holy Spirit, they were a big zero.

So - the main theme of these chapters is the abuse by the members of the Church in Corinth of their spiritual gifts, and one of the ways this was manifested is how they were treating one another. However, that's not the main theme, only a secondary one (another secondary theme is their abuse of the Lord's Supper).

Does that help?

Hope so!

Thankyou for your reply.
I agree with what you've said for the most part about tongues abuse. The idea that if you don't have this gift of tongues you're not saved is a stumbling block for those who believe it. There looking for gifts as proof of Salvation instead of fruits which is the proof they should be looking for.

There is so much that is only hinted at in scripture that I would love to know more about but just isn’t there. Heaven is only briefly out lined. The millennial reign is another. What will man do with eternal life and so on. We know we will be with Christ and worship Him but I don’t believe that this is all there is to it. I believe we will have challenges but what kind? Some of these things the Bible explains only in part. Which is why I think the Bible isn't really complete yet.
MB

 

[Todd W. White]

Hi MB,

Also - tongues-speakers usually equate doing so as an evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

One of the arguments against that is the example of Jesus Christ - our Supreme Example, I might add - He was THE MOST Spirit-filled person to ever live, yet, if speaking in tongues is a sign of being Spirit-filled, why don't we even have ONE record of Him doing so?

The answer is simple - speaking in tongues isn't a sign of being saved OR Spirit-filled!

 

[webdog]

Hi MB,

Also - tongues-speakers usually equate doing so as an evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

One of the arguments against that is the example of Jesus Christ - our Supreme Example, I might add - He was THE MOST Spirit-filled person to ever live, yet, if speaking in tongues is a sign of being Spirit-filled, why don't we even have ONE record of Him doing so?

The answer is simple - speaking in tongues isn't a sign of being saved OR Spirit-filled!

I agree with you, but couldn't it have been said while on the cross He did this when the witnesses thought He was calling for Elijah?

 

[MB]

I agree with you, but couldn't it have been said while on the cross He did this when the witnesses thought He was calling for Elijah?

Hi Webdog;
The reason they thought that is maybe because the name Elijah means God of Jehovah or the first part of the name ELI is part of what Christ called out.
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

MB

 

[Todd W. White]

He was speaking a dialect of Hebrew, which is transliterated into Greek, then translated into the English - "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?"

It would not have been considered by those hearing it as some sort of gibberish, else we would not know what it means - it was a language known to the speaker AND some, at least, of those hearing it, unlike the SG of tongues, where the person speaking had not learned the language he was using.