Comments on: What are “tongues” in Acts 2? (Part 4) http://www.4-14.org.uk/tongues-in-acts-2-part-4 …Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves… Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:13:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: RMG http://www.4-14.org.uk/tongues-in-acts-2-part-4/comment-page-1#comment-23540 RMG Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:23:21 +0000 http://www.4-14.org.uk/173-tongues-in-acts-2-part-3-2#comment-23540 Another question, I noticed you referred to the 120 as the tongue speakers, but doesn't 2:14 seem to indicate that the 12 apostles were the speakers? I don't know what the time lapse between the selection of Matthias and Pentecost was and maybe that's part of my problem, but I was just curious. Thanks! Another question, I noticed you referred to the 120 as the tongue speakers, but doesn’t 2:14 seem to indicate that the 12 apostles were the speakers? I don’t know what the time lapse between the selection of Matthias and Pentecost was and maybe that’s part of my problem, but I was just curious. Thanks!

]]> By: RMG http://www.4-14.org.uk/tongues-in-acts-2-part-4/comment-page-1#comment-23539 RMG Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:12:49 +0000 http://www.4-14.org.uk/173-tongues-in-acts-2-part-3-2#comment-23539 Thanks for those thoughts! I'm curious what you think about the possibility of an interpretation of the tongues being ecstatic based upon the miracle being the hearing of those present. It seems like this might be a possible conclusion and something I've been thinking about for the past few days. However I noticed that in the passages that mention the "hearing" of the tongues (vs. 6, 8, 11) verses 6 & 8 use glossa, while verse 11 uses dialektos. I believe the terms are certainly interchangeable and this confirms my belief that it is the case with the hearers too. Curious what you think about that conclusion. Thanks for those thoughts! I’m curious what you think about the possibility of an interpretation of the tongues being ecstatic based upon the miracle being the hearing of those present. It seems like this might be a possible conclusion and something I’ve been thinking about for the past few days. However I noticed that in the passages that mention the “hearing” of the tongues (vs. 6, 8, 11) verses 6 & 8 use glossa, while verse 11 uses dialektos. I believe the terms are certainly interchangeable and this confirms my belief that it is the case with the hearers too. Curious what you think about that conclusion.

]]> By: Mark Barnes http://www.4-14.org.uk/tongues-in-acts-2-part-4/comment-page-1#comment-18194 Mark Barnes Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:35:23 +0000 http://www.4-14.org.uk/173-tongues-in-acts-2-part-3-2#comment-18194 Thanks for your question, David. I think Carson, Forbes and Gaffin are all correct on this point. Carson says it demonstrates that “prophecy is an expression that embraces tongues”. Forbes says that “Luke conceives of glossolalia as a subspecies within the broader category of ‘prophecy’”, whilst Gaffin argues that “We may even speak of the essentially prophetic nature of tongues… tongues are a mode of prophecy”. If tongues (in Acts 2 at least) is “embraced by” prophecy, or is a “subspecies” of prophecy, then the gift of tongues is really a certain type of prophecy. The real question, of course, is 'what type?'. Thanks for your question, David.

I think Carson, Forbes and Gaffin are all correct on this point. Carson says it demonstrates that “prophecy is an expression that embraces tongues”. Forbes says that “Luke conceives of glossolalia as a subspecies within the broader category of ‘prophecy’”, whilst Gaffin argues that “We may even speak of the essentially prophetic nature of tongues… tongues are a mode of prophecy”.

If tongues (in Acts 2 at least) is “embraced by” prophecy, or is a “subspecies” of prophecy, then the gift of tongues is really a certain type of prophecy.

The real question, of course, is ‘what type?’.

]]> By: David Morgan http://www.4-14.org.uk/tongues-in-acts-2-part-4/comment-page-1#comment-18187 David Morgan Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:33:52 +0000 http://www.4-14.org.uk/173-tongues-in-acts-2-part-3-2#comment-18187 This is a question, i wonder if you have considered it? When peter speaks to the crowd he says this is what was spoken of by the prophet Joel, and yet joel doesn't mention tongues but prophesy? Any thoughts? This is a question, i wonder if you have considered it? When peter speaks to the crowd he says this is what was spoken of by the prophet Joel, and yet joel doesn’t mention tongues but prophesy? Any thoughts?

]]>