We’re currently examining tongues in Acts 2, and the previous post considered the question Are tongues in Acts 2 a gift of hearing, rather than speaking? Today I want to deal with two more questions.

Are tongues in Acts 2 a “heavenly language” understood only by interpretation?

Whilst this suggestion has been made for glossolalia in Corinthians, it is not even remotely credible in Acts, as there is no suggestion that any interpreters were present.

Are tongues in Acts 2 unintelligible, ecstatic speech?

If the tongues are not a miracle of hearing then it follows that they cannot be unintelligible speech. There is simply too much emphasis on the intelligibility of the speech for it to be ecstatic. The only “evidence” from Acts that it was ecstatic is that the disciples were accused of drunkenness (Acts 2:13). If the only reaction was a belief that the disciples were drunk, this would be evidence for ecstasy. However, according to Luke, the accusation of drunkenness is only one reaction. Many others affirm the intelligibility of the speech, both in the language (“in our own tongues”), and in the content (“we hear them telling… the mighty works of God”). Moreover, this partial accusation of drunkenness would more easily follow if the speech was the ability to speak in many human languages (see a future post). Therefore in Acts 2, Luke cannot be referring to ecstatic, unintelligible utterances.

Next time we’ll deal (in much more detail) with the question: Are tongues in Acts 2 the non-miraculous speaking of a human language?

Popularity: 3% [?]

Three weeks ago I posted a slightly provocative post entitled Why Charismatics are not New Testament Christians. That post focussed largely on prophecy, today I want to look at the gift of tongues.

The Gift of Tongues

Of all the so-called charismatic gifts, tongues-speaking is the one that non-charismatics have the most trouble in understanding and accepting. Most Charismatics believe that “speaking in tongues is prayer or praise spoken in syllables not understood by the speaker”.¹ Tongues, in other words, are understandable only with interpretation. Frankly, this turns the clock back on the reformation. Charismatics who practice tongues-speaking in public worship have given up the hard-won victory that the word of God should be in the language of the hearer.

Continue reading ‘Why charismatic speaking in tongues should only be practiced by Catholics’

Popularity: 3% [?]

I had intended to do a round-up of recent debate in blogosphere, but I need to get something off my chest. The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that only non-Charismatics have really taken the New Covenant Age of the Spirit seriously. Charismatics are still stuck in the Old Testament age. They’re not New Testament believers – they’re Old Testament believers.

Let me explain what I mean.

The Gift of Prophecy

Take the gift of prophecy for example. Many cessationists are happy to acknowledge that the gift of prophecy is a New Covenant gift for all believers. The cessationist Richard Gaffin, writes this:

…according to the New Testament all believers are prophets; the whole church is a congregation of prophets. Analogous to the Reformation insistence on the universal priesthood of believers, we may speak of the ‘prophethood’ of all within the new covenant community…¹

The charismatic on the other hand believes that there are only some New Testament believes who are gifted as prophets. The majority of us don’t have that office. And so, just like the Old Testament priests and prophets, there is a spiritual hierarchy, and those who are not prophets must go to those who are to find out what God’s will is for them.

Continue reading ‘Why Charismatics are not New Testament Christians’

Popularity: 8% [?]

I’ve been tremendously helped by Dan Doriani’s A Man After God’s Heart which I’d thoroughly recommend to every Christian man. It’s honest, biblical, and Christ-centered. The extract below is one I can certainly relate to:

The man after God’s heart is a sinner, and everywhere he goes, he participates in societies of sinners. At work he puts down his rivals; he shades the truth to get a slight advantage. At home he rebukes his children a little too harshly for sins he showed them how to commit. With a friend, he puts up an argument even when he knows he is wrong, because he would rather be wrong than appear to be wrong. In athletic contests and checkout lines, he chooses not to correct errors made in his favour. He would weep over it all if he were not so cold. I know it; at least I know it, we think. We cling to the Gospel, but even our clinging is tainted because we are too glad that our sin is covered, and not sorry enough that we did it. We even need to repent of our repentance… The man after God’s heart knows this and so returns again and again to the beloved Gospel.

Popularity: 2% [?]