Tongues Cease of Themselves and Greek Middle?

[EdSutton]

Just musing after reading the last page of the thread: Why do I seem to find that those who worry about me 'adding to' the word usually seem to be trying to 'take away from' the word, and those that seem concerned that I'm 'taking away from' usually seem to be trying to 'add to' the word. Has that happened to any of you, or is it just me?
Ed

 

[Ray Berrian]

Neither I Corinthians 13:8 or Daniel 12:4 spakes about 'revelatory knowledge'/knowledge as to a completed revelation of the Word of God.

The Apostle Paul did, however, speak of 'knowledge.'

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
You are wrenching the Scipture again with your gibberish. The Word did not say "they did cease" or that they "did cease" as you twist above. What it does say is ' . . . they shall cease,' which is in the future tense. (future middle indicative).

Remeber Ray, it is your gibberish, not mine. And it is gibberish that it is not found in the Bible--Greek or English. You have been continually challenged to do so, and you have continually denied to bring any evidence forth contrary to the statement which you made, which makes you one who lies and bears false witness to the truth. You have been warned of this many times. But you post inspite of it. Not a very honorable postion to take as a Christian is it?
The Word of God plainly says that the gifts have ceased. You have been given plenty of Scripture which you ignore. In fact the very Scripture (thought written in the future in 55 A.D.), you still interpret in the future. said back then "will cease." 2,000 years later you still affirm it means "will cease," which is ludicrous to believe. What you mean to say is that Paul really meant "will continue" but he didn't write that, he wrote "will cease," which they did. You refuse to believe the Scripture, and are trying your best to rewrite it.
[qb]

No time framwork, in this love chapter, is give as to what time in the future these three things will cease. But since knowledge and prophecy have not as yet ceased, we assume also that 'tongues' is still in vogue.[/b]

There is a time-framework when other Scripture is considered and not isolated as other cults do. Your hermeneutic style is very similar to the cults.
1. It ceased when the Bible was complete (1Cor.13:8-13).
2. It ceased when the Apostles died (2Cor.12:12; Heb.2:3,4)--signs of an apostle.
3. It ceased when the first century Jews passed away, for it was a sign to those Jews (1Cor.14:21)
It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign. What company are you in?

Knowledge--Daniel 12:4--knowledge will multiply rather than slow down and cease until the time of the end. By injecting the word, 'revelatory' in front of knowledge you wilfully change the meaning of God's Word as the Lord warned us not to do in Revelation 22:18. Don't do as the cultists do by changing or adding different words to the N.T.

I don't add, I clarify. You don't complain when the KJV translators do the same thing by adding the word "unknown" in italics, showing that it is not in the original. It does not belong there and has only confused rather than clarified the situtation. I clarify the situation because it is obviously not common knowledge that will cease. I agree with you that knowledge in the last days will increase like Daniel says. There is no doubt about that. Daniel is speaking of common knowledge, but Paul is not. He is speaking of revelatory knowledge--the gift of knowledge. It is in the context of spiritual of gifts. It is not in the context of technology and computer-knwledge. That is not a spiritual gift. But revelatory knowledge was a spiritual gift that God does not give any more, because we have all the revelation that we need in the Word of God. The canon of Scripture is closed.

Prophecy will still be operative in the Great Tribulation as duly noted in Revelation 11:3 & 6.

How many times have I explained this to you in various threads--20?? Paul is not speaking about Heaven, where there will be no need for the Bible or prophecy. I don't intend to be here for the Tribulation. Paul is not speaking about the Millennial Kingdom after I come back with him to enter into the Millennial Kingdom with Him. He is speaking of this present Church Age, this dispensation of time, where the Word of God is applicable. The gift of prophecy is no longer for today, that is for this Church Today. Quit throwing red herrings into the picture.

Tongues, where the Elders will allow the Holy Spirit to still minister in Christian churches does make Himself evident with 'tongues' along with the 'interpretation of tongues.'

Your argument is seriously flawed.
Show me one church in this world today that practices tongues in a Biblical manner. You can't. There isn't one. There isn't any church today that has the gift of the already ceased langauges. If there was missionaries would be going to foreign nations without learning the languages. But that doesn't happen, even among Charismatic Churches. Quite ironic isn't it?
The Biblical speaking in tongues is speaking in foreign national langauges miraculously without first studying the foreign languages. It doesn't happen today. The gift has ceased.
DHK

 

[Ray Berrian]

Attend the Bethlehem Assembly of God Church in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania for a month of Sundays and you will find a church that allowes the Holy Spirit to minister His gifts. You will be in awe as to how God works through what He says to the people of God.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Attend the Bethlehem Assembly of God Church in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania for a month of Sundays and you will find a church that allowes the Holy Spirit to minister His gifts. You will be in awe as to how God works through what He says to the people of God.

I don't need to. My foundation is the Word of God, not experience. It is unfortunate that you base your theology on your emotions and your experience. You theology must fluctuate quite a bit. Does it change every time the wind changes?

I don't have to stick my head in a garbage pail to find out if it is dirty.
I don't have to take heroin to know that it harms my body, or to have the experience so that I can win the drug addicts. This is a fair assessment of your argument. If I take heroin long enough then I would see all the benefits of taking heroin. Right? That is precisely the logic you used. If I go to your AOG church my eyes would be opened, if only I went there long enough.

If only I would try to commit suicide enough times eventually I would succeed, Right?

I am so thankful that I have the Word of God as my guide and my final authority rather than the experiences of life. Experiences lead one astray.
DHK

 

[Ray Berrian]

I believe in 'sole Scriptura' more strongly than you. I let Scripture speak to me and not my ruling Elders in church. What is the name of your denomination that dictates what you are to believe?

By coming for a month of Sundays I only meant that not every Lord's day does someone speak 'in tongues' with an 'interpretation of tongues.'

Apparently, you are bold enough to think that all Assembly of God churches are garbage bins. This is hardly showing brotherly love toward other Christians who think differently than you.

I John 3:14 still is true. I John 4:7 also is still the truth.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I believe in 'sole Scriptura' more strongly than you. I let Scripture speak to me and not my ruling Elders in church.

Apparently you don't because the Word says that we are to submit to the Elders who rule over us (1 Pet. 5:5). The above quote seems to imply that you do not listen to your church's pastors/elders at all much less submit to them.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
By coming for a month of Sundays I only meant that not every Lord's day does someone speak 'in tongues' with an 'interpretation of tongues.'

Does that mean that on some Sundays there is "speaking in tongues" without "interpretation of tongues"?

[ February 08, 2006, 06:02 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I believe in 'sole Scriptura' more strongly than you. I let Scripture speak to me and not my ruling Elders in church. What is the name of your denomination that dictates what you are to believe?

Your post is quite humorous Ray. (and yet sad at the same time.
First, we don't have "ruling elders," and I am the pastor. My church does not belong to a denomination. I have told you that before. We are completely independent. Everything I teach, I get from the Lord, from His Word. His Word is my final authority in all thiings pertaining to faith and practice. Whatever I preach always comes is grounded in the Word of God, never in experience. An experience can only be used to illustrate a truth already taught in the Word of God. That is not what Charismatics do. They teach according to their experiences. The experiences become foundational for their "truth" whatever that may be.

By coming for a month of Sundays I only meant that not every Lord's day does someone speak 'in tongues' with an 'interpretation of tongues.'

And when they do speak in tongues do you know the language: Cree? Mohawk? Maori? Hindi? Danish? What is the language being spoken and how do you know. And if you don't know the language being spoken, how would you know if the interpretation is correct?

Apparently, you are bold enough to think that all Assembly of God churches are garbage bins. This is hardly showing brotherly love toward other Christians who think differently than you.

Apparently you are bold enough and low enough to take words out of context. Next time you want to cast slurs like that quote me. Use the quote button. Did I say that AOG churches were garbage bins? Yes or no? Now about showing brotherly love; what does the Bible say about false accusations?
The AOG churches hold to aberrant doctrine which is unbiblical, and for that they need to be warned.

I John 3:14 still is true. I John 4:7 also is still the truth.

I agree. All the verses in the Bible are true, and inspired. They are profitable.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
DHK

 

[Ray Berrian]

DHK,

You freely admit that you do not have other lay or clerical Elders to hold your views in check as coming from the Bible. That is why you believe your error and are poisoning your congregation with the same confusion and hateful words as you offer me and other readers on this board.

This is not keeping within the text of I John 4:7. Tell us that Pentecosts speak 'gibberish' is hardly cutting them a break as to being within the Christian community of faith.

 

[DHK]

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Romans 2:1-2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

1 John 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.

Romans 16:17-18 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (like Benny Hinn)

I freely admit that I am a servant of Jesus Christ. Is there something wrong with that Ray?
I freely admit that the Bible and not man is my sole guide and authority in all matters of faith and practice. Is there something wrong with that Ray?
If I have said anything that is doctrinally wrong I ask you to point to it and Scripturally show me what I have said that is doctrinally wrong. If you cannot do so stop with the hateful speech and the false accusations.
I have quoted the above verses for you that give commands for the believer to point out error where error needs to be pointed out, and to avoid all such that promote false doctrine such as Benny Hinn. That, sir, is love, not hatred. It is a love for purity of the truth, rather than a love for the corruption of the Word of God such as Benny Hinn teaches.
The aberrant teaching of the Pentecostals in speaking gibberish is not Biblical. People need to be warned about such error. That is not hate; it is a love for the truth of the Word of God, and for others that they may not go astray and fall into the snares of the devil. The very fact that you reject truth shows that you do not love the truth of the Word of God as you ought.

Search the Scriptures. That is a command of God. But you don't follow through with it.
DHK

 

[Stpaul]

The tongues mentioned in 1 Cor. 13 were a referance to the sum total of all human language which will cease with the coming of the perfect which is the eternal state.

 

[Charles Meadows]

By golly I think StPaul is on to something!!

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Stpaul:
The tongues mentioned in 1 Cor. 13 were a referance to the sum total of all human language which will cease with the coming of the perfect which is the eternal state.

It is unlikely that "that which is perfect" refers to the eternal state. Context doesn't allow for it. The context is revelation--the revelation of God's Word. The three spiritual gifts mentioned in 13:8 are prophecy, tongues, and knowledge (i.e., revelatory knowledge), all three of which are gifts related to the giving of God's revealed Word before it was "completed" or perfected. In chapter 14 the discussion carries on about two of these revelatory gifts. The cotext is gifts relating to God's revelation to mankind. The eternal state has nothing to do with it.
Furthermore what does eternal state mean according to one's theology? Does it mean when the rapture occurs? When the second advent occurs after the Tribulation and just before the Millennium? Does it mean after the Millennium? After the Great White Throne Judgement? When?
Again, the neuter gender of teleion does not necessarily fit "the neutral state" however that would be referred to in the Greek. But the Word would fit that context. And when the Bible was "completed" or "perfected" (both words mean the same) at the end of the first century, these gifts ceased. Tongues probably ceased before that because it was a sign specific to the Jews (1Cor.14:21).
Either way all the gifts were signs of an apostle which gave identification to the apostles and their message as genuine messengers of God, and likewise their message as being from God.

Hebrews 2:3-4 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

2 Corinthians 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

When the Apostolic age was over, with the death of the last apostle (John) at the end of the first century, then the gifts were over. There was no more need of them.
The gifts ceased. They ceased by the end of the first century for a variety of reasons.
History confirms it as well.
DHK

 

[Stpaul]

Your entire scenario presupposes that Paul was looking forward to some kind of Bible completion(and he wouldn't have even known what a Bible was) despite the fact he felt that he may still be around for Christ's return(1 Thes.4:17). If you were to ask Paul "Did you have in mind the completion of the cannon when you said "perfect" in 1Cor.13?" He probably would have said,"the completion of the what?" A greater problem of your scenario though is the fact that the completion of the Bible in no way guarentees that I will Know as I am Known. But being with Christ in the eternal state does guarantee this. The tongues referred to in this passage 13:8 is a referance to the sum total of all human language not the real gift of tongues which probably was last given in Acts 19.Prophecy mentioned in 13:8 is probably talking about the kind of prophecies the Corinth "prophets" normally gave -failed ones the same kind that you hear in charismatic circles today. Your understanding of the entire context of chapter 13 is minimal. There Paul was exalting these gifts:faith,hope and love as the best gifts for each Christian to earnestly covet and manifest in their lives. He opens up chapter 14 by introducing the excellant way-to prophesy in such way as to edify the church this was not a special gift but something all could do.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Stpaul:
Your entire scenario presupposes that Paul was looking forward to some kind of Bible completion(and he wouldn't have even known what a Bible was) despite the fact he felt that he may still be around for Christ's return(1 Thes.4:17). If you were to ask Paul "Did you have in mind the completion of the cannon when you said "perfect" in 1Cor.13?" He probably would have said,"the completion of the what?"

You seem to think you know the mind of Paul? Any special revelation on your part?
Paul was looking forward to the coming of Christ, that is true. He taught that it was imminent. But the context here is not talking of the coming of Christ, and is certainly not talking of the eternal state which is mentioned nowhere. Context is your biggest problem. You are inserting a concept into this passage--a preconceived idea--that doesn't fit whatsoever.
Did Paul know when Christ was going to come? No.
Did Paul know when the Bible would be complete? No.
But he knew there would be a coming or completion of both.
Consider the context of the entire chapter. Paul is making some comparisons. There are three different types of gifts that he mentions here: permanent, semi-permanent, and temporary.
There is only one gift that is a permanent gift, and that is love. Verse 8 says that love never fails. The others (prophecy, tongues, knowledge) will all fail, cease or pass away. But love will never pass away. It will go on forever. In verse 13, love (in comparison to faith and hope) is the greatest of all the gifts. It is the greatest gift. It will never cease.
The second group of gifts are faith and hope (vs.13). They are semi-permanent gifts. How long will they last? The Bible says that we walk by faith, and not by sight. When Christ comes we no longer will need faith. We shall see him as he is. Faith will cease when we see Christ--when he comes. Likewise hope. Christ is our hope. When Christ comes we have nothing more to hope for. Both hope and faith will cease at the coming of Christ.
Thus: Love will never cease.
Faith and hope will cease at the coming of Christ.
That leaves prophecy, tongues and prophecy.
When will they cease? According to the comparison that Paul gives it must be sometime before the coming of Christ, sometime before faith and hope. There are permanent, semi-permanent, and temporary gifts. These three (prophecy, tongues, and revelatory prophecy) were only temporary in nature, and meant for a short period of time. They ceased by the end of the first century with the completion of the Word of God. This can be verified by other Scriptures, especially in respect to the gift of tongues. However, contextually, these three temporary gifts "those which are in part" could not have lasted up until the coming of Christ. Paul said "they would cease." They have, as Paul said almost 2,000 years ago. Most Charismatics think that Paul has lied, and want to change that word "cease" to "continue." The gifts haven't continued. That is not what Paul said. He said they would cease. It is now over 19 centuries later. I don't think that Paul was speaking of an event to happen two millennia down the road. He was speaking of the Word of God, and soon these temporary gifts would cease for soon the Bible would be complete.

A greater problem of your scenario though is the fact that the completion of the Bible in no way guarentees that I will Know as I am Known.

James 1:23-25 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

James uses the metaphor of the Word of God as a mirror. Man looks into the Word of God and sees himself as he is. In the Old Testament they could only see through a glass darkly because they only had part of the Word of God, and thus could not see clearly. They could see "Jesus Christ concealed." With the New Testament, they would be able to "see Jesus Christ revealed."
The Apostles knew that their writings were Scripture, and apparently which of their writings were Scripture and which were not. Consider:

2 Peter 3:15-16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Note that Peter accounted the epistles of Paul as Scripture, and apparently knew which ones were Scripture.
Consider again:
2 Peter 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

There are two important groups of people here by whom God spoke and the readers were instructed were told to listen to: the prophets of old, and the apostles of the Lord. The words of both were just as inspired as one another. The Jews put great importance and value on the Old Testament writings. They were to put just as much importance on the writings of the Apostles which eventually made up our New Testament.

But being with Christ in the eternal state does guarantee this.

Other concepts might fit the same thing, but they don't fit the concept. You are no better than a philosopher if you fail to take the context of the passage in question into consideration. Learn the principles of hermeneutics.

The tongues referred to in this passage 13:8 is a referance to the sum total of all human language not the real gift of tongues which probably was last given in Acts 19.

And you get this idea from where??
1Cor.12-14, all three chapters speak about the spiritual gifts. Remember: You must keep things in their context! What do we know about the context here?

1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
--This is the first verse of chapter 12, and then Paul proceeds to elaborate for the next three chapters on this very subject. Thus in 13:8 he is speaking of the gift of prophecy, the gift of tongues, and the gift of knowledge, all of which would cease.

Prophecy mentioned in 13:8 is probably talking about the kind of prophecies the Corinth "prophets" normally gave -failed ones the same kind that you hear in charismatic circles today.

The gift of prophecy has ceased. There is nothing that happens in Charismatic churches today that is even remotely connected to what hapened in the Bible.

Your understanding of the entire context of chapter 13 is minimal.

I'll ignore that remark; but you do have much to learn.

There Paul was exalting these gifts:faith,hope and love as the best gifts for each Christian to earnestly covet and manifest in their lives. He opens up chapter 14 by introducing the excellant way-to prophesy in such way as to edify the church this was not a special gift but something all could do.

It was not something all could do. He never said that all could do that. Read the context
Here is just one example how all could not prophecy:
1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
--Women could not speak in tongues whatsoever.
Read chapter 12. God did not give tongues to everyone, and nowhere in Scripture did he advise for anyone to seek for the gift. God gave gifts to the church. Chapter 14 shows the value of prophecy as a gift over that of tongues, for prophecy edifies and teaches, and tongues without interpretation only brings chaos and confusion.
None of these gifts are operative today.
No one on this board has been able to demonstrate through Scripture where the Charismatic type gibberish which they call "tongues" is Biblical. It isn't. The Greek word "glossa" always means a language as in a national language. It never refers to an ecstatic nonsense speech in the Bible. The only ones who spoke in ecstatic speech (gibberish) were pagan religions.
DHK

 

[Stpaul]

If the Holy Spirit wanted the women to speak in tongues they would have (this probably happened in Acts 10). The women of Corinth, like the men and like the rest of modern day Pentecostalism were and are not speaking with the gift of languages(plural) but rather speak in an unknown tongue(singular). The church of Corinth never had the gift of tongues it was entirely counterfeit. The real gift of tongues was entirely controlled by the Holy Spirit no one ever misused it; no one could have. It occured probably no more than 4 times over a 20 year time period and has never occurred since. You say that not all at Corinth could prophesy but verse 31 desputes you(this verse is not speaking of a special gift, verse 1 shows that,see also 10:5) The Corinthians that thought they were true prophets only thought they were but that is as far as it went(14:37). The church at Corinth was infilterated with pagan influences primarily gnostic. I would consider a particular sect within it as a cult(those saying "I am of Cephas") Things had gotten so pagan here that an insestuous relationship between a son and his step mother was something to glory in rather than be ashamed of(5:2&6). Most pagans would even think that to be a bit out there. Even their practise of the Lord's table was so vile that Paul would refer to it as "the table of devils"(10:21) It was this practise that was causing sickness and even death amoungst them. Something so wierd that it makes pagans look like saints. Do some research on early gnostic "christian" forms of communion you will not believe what you find.

 

[Stpaul]

Do a google search on "The Gospels of Thomas and Eve". Pay attention to how they practiced commounion-unbelievable! See 1Cor. 11 and 2Cor 11:3. Research David Berg,flirty fishing and the Children of God. He was the closest match to Corinths own arch heretic. Many of his practices and beliefs mirror Corinths. Examine all of Corinths problems and research books or web sites that examine cult characteristics and see if there isn't a parallel. Examine 2Cor.2&7 and and then research ex-cult victims coming out of their cults and notice the reaction of Corinths deliverance to those feelings and discoveries of recovering cult victims. Study sophistry an art of debate prevelant in 1Cor.14. Here's one for you-follow the trail of Simon Magus from Samaria to Rome which takes him through Corinth. He was consider to be the first to merge gnostism with Christianity. Notice his teachings and how 1Cor. is a disection of them. Notice his nickname "The Standing One" and where Paul refers to it-1Cor.10:12.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Stpaul:
If the Holy Spirit wanted the women to speak in tongues they would have (this probably happened in Acts 10). The women of Corinth, like the men and like the rest of modern day Pentecostalism were and are not speaking with the gift of languages(plural) but rather speak in an unknown tongue(singular).

You are inserting your preconceived ideas here without any Biblical support. There is no speaking in gibberish anywhere in the Bible. Take the word "unknown" out of 1Cor.14. See in the KJV that it is in italics. That meaans that it is not in the Greek. It doesn't belong there. Now you end up with a phrase like this: "He that speaks in a "tongue." Now put the proper translation or tongue in. Now it reads: "He that speakks in a language." Never can it be rendered or translated gibberish. It is always langauges--foreign or national languages--languages that were known to mankind. That is what the word "glossa" means. You are reading into the text something that is not there. You are doing exactly what the Catholics do to prove their point about infant baptism when they claim that the household of the jailor had infants. It didn't happen. You are reading into Scripture that which is not there, and that which goes contrary to the Word of God. Glossa means language, not gibberish--all the time. You have pre-conceived ideas. You are trying to force them into certain verses in the Bible where they don't belong in order to fit your theology. That is not rightly dividing the truth. It is wrongly butchering it.
BTW, modern Pentecostalism, and the phenomena of modern day tongues did not start until the beginning day of the 20th century. We must conclude therefore that the Charismatics believe that the Holy Spirit (and thus God) was dead for 1900 years previous to this time.

The church of Corinth never had the gift of tongues it was entirely counterfeit.

It was not counterfeit at all. It was being misused. Paul was correcting its abuses. For example he says when you, (who have the gift) speak in tongues, let it be in order, turn by turn (not all at once), and then two or three at the most. And each one had to have an interpreter. If they did not have an interpreter they had to sit down and keep quiet in the church. These individuals did have the genuine gift, but they had to use it properly. There had to be order in the church.

The real gift of tongues was entirely controlled by the Holy Spirit no one ever misused it; no one could have.

That is not true. See my above answer. Any gift can be misused. No man is perfect.

It occured probably no more than 4 times over a 20 year time period and has never occurred since.

There are three recorded incidents of speaking in tongues in the Book of Acts. And then we have the incidents recorded in the Corinthian Church. We also have the statement of Paul: "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than ye all." Obviously tongues was spoken many times from the Day of Pentecost at least up until the time of 70 A.D. and maybe a bit longer. It was a sign to the Jews (1Cor.14:21).
You say that not all at Corinth could prophesy but verse 31 desputes you(this verse is not speaking of a special gift, verse 1 shows that,see also 10:5) [/qb][/quote]
Let's see who is right:

1 Corinthians 12:28-30 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.
29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
--Verse 28 gives a list of all the gifts.
--Verses 29 and 30 give a list of rhetorical questions that all have the same answer. The answer is obviously: NO!
No, all don't have the same gift, including propecy and tongues.

1 Corinthians 12:7-10 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 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:

Different gifts were given to different individuals. Not everyone had the same gift. The Scripture is very clear on this point. Take your argument up with God on this point.

The Corinthians that thought they were true prophets only thought they were but that is as far as it went(14:37).

1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
--Notice that it says "if any man," not "if ALL men" think himself to be a prophet. There is no hint that ALL the Corinthians thought themselves to be prophets. Only some of them had the gift. And only some of those were abusing it.

The church at Corinth was infilterated with pagan influences primarily gnostic. I would consider a particular sect within it as a cult(those saying "I am of Cephas") Things had gotten so pagan here that an insestuous relationship between a son and his step mother was something to glory in rather than be ashamed of(5:2&6). Most pagans would even think that to be a bit out there. Even their practise of the Lord's table was so vile that Paul would refer to it as "the table of devils"(10:21) It was this practise that was causing sickness and even death amoungst them. Something so wierd that it makes pagans look like saints. Do some research on early gnostic "christian" forms of communion you will not believe what you find.

I have done plenty of research on this subject. My own personal commentary on the First Epistle of Corinthians is 674 pages. I have done my research.
The key verse to this epistle is found in 7:1

1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
Paul is writing back to the Corinthians in response to a letter written to him about various problems that they were facing. Each chapter addresses one or more of those problems. Chapters 12 through 14 he spends on the spiritual gifts.
Paul does refer to their pagan background and the influence it has on their practice in speaking in tongues in 1Cor.12:1-3. But nowhere does he refer to speaking in gibberish--the Charismatic phenomena of speaking in tongues--a cheap imitation of the Biblical gift which comes from another source other than the Holy Spirit. It is not of God. The only place you find speaking in ecstatic speech is among pagan religions.
DHK

 

[Stpaul]

Take note of Simons prostitute girlfriend and the evidences of her reflected in Paul's writtings. Study Monasticism a second century Corinthian type of church. Study archeological evidence concerning a "mystery language" developed by Simon which was nothing more than gibberish. Which I claim he would label as "tongues" and propagate it as a special way to communicate with God. Study all the unique characteristics of the real gift of tongues and tell me how they were prevelant at Corinth-which cannot be done-by anyone. Show me how Paul's rules for use of this unknown tongue could apply in any instance in Acts tongues speaking. Show me what Paul meant "with craftiness and guile I caught you"and "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness" and then show me how these verses and Paul's style of"to the Jew I became a Jew" could never apply concerning Corinths problems. Do these things and then come and tell me I knew nothing of the context.

 

[DHK]

You are taking bits and pieces of parts of the Bible and throwing them together to try and make a case for what you call tongues (gibberish) when there is none. The Bible speaks nothing of the sort. Take one passage at a time and tell how you think it applies to speaking in tongues. Remember I have the upper hand here. The gift is speaking in languages. The word glossa means languages. It is the same gift that was given on the Day of Pentecost. "How hear we every man in our own language." They spoke in languages there, and they spoke in languages in Corinth. Nothing had changed. The gift is the same. God never changed the gift. It is the gift of tongues (languages). If you think anything has changed demonstrate it through Scripture. Take your bits and pieces of Scripture and elabroate on them one at a time, and I will show you that you are quoting entirely out of context.
For example "to the Jew I became a Jew." What has that got to do with anything? It has nothing to do with the gift of tongues. To use such a verse to defend your position is no better than the way cults use various verses to defend theirs. You have to do better. I have given you ample proof already in previous posts how the gift of languages is just that--national languages. Most of it you have not responded to in an adequate fashioon. It is your turn. The ball is in your park. Demonstrate through Scripture where gibberish is found in the Bible as the gift of tongues.
DHK