The Elephant in the New Testament

[Buddy D. Mouse]

This will be a thread to look at the DIVERSE KINDS OF TONGUES recorded in the New Testament,

Please - please - please do not not let this thread be about Cessationism (Cessionism) vs Continuationism.

That is not what this OP and thread is about.

I realize that some people think diverse kinds of tongues means ONLY different human languages, well, we will look at tongues in the New Testament.

So much emphasis is put on Day of Pentecost - Acts 2.

I feel there is so much to look at on that day that its practically inexhaustible.

First there is a pre-Pentecost, or Proto-Pentecost passage, when Jesus BREATHED on the disciples and SAID "receive the Holy Spirit";

all but Thomas were present when He said "receive ye the Holy Ghost"

The Bible does not say they DID receive Him then, it does not say they did NOT receive Holy Ghost then, does not say they spoke in tongues at that time, does not say they didn't.

John 20:22

Now we are ready to look at Day of Pentecost.

 

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

Eight days go by, then He appears again with Thomas present, Thomas is offered to put his hands in Christ's wounds - does not - but says "My Lord and my God". Disciples are told to wait in Jerusalem, told to not do anything til they are endowed with power, told not to leave Jerusalem. Did they obey?

I'll leave it up to you - the election of Matthias to take the place of Judas Iscariot - the journey to Galilee because Peter wants to go back to work fishing - a full forty days go by (whether that INCLUDES the eight, I dunno) and now we are at Day of Pentecost.

[Buddy D. Mouse]

There were about a hundred and twenty believers present - must have been quite a large UPPER ROOM - and we come to what I call the INITIAL OUTPOURING on these 120 believers - remember Mother Mary and other women are included - speaking in tongues along with the rest of 'em when The Holy Ghost comes.  In Acts 2:4, the 120 get the Holy Ghost - and speak in other tongues.

My mind boggles to picture all of this. Were they outside, in Solomon's Porch by now? They were in an upper room, Acts 2:5 passes quickly into the non-Aramaic-speaking visitors hearing in their own languages. Note that in Acts 2:4 the disciples SPOKE in other tongues; this is not yet a miracle of HEARING ONLY - that IMO comes later when Peter addresses the crowd alone - but for now we have disciples SPEAKING in tongues, as well as visitors HEARING in their own languages.

 

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

I have tried to picture maybe Phillip speaking Cretan to some Cretans, Bartholomew speaking Parthian to some Parthians, etc., but as I say - it boggles my mind...

There were a lot of people visiting Jerusalem. Let's say more than three thousand in this area, because 3,000 believe and join the church after Peter's sermon.

There is much confusion and chaos - Peter starts his sermon by first trying to convince the crowd that the disciples are not DRUNK - but rather that a prophecy of Joel has come to pass. IMO, at this point, Peter speaks in his native Aramaic and the HEARING ONLY MIRACLE occurs. How much HEBREW was known by everybody escapes me, probably not enough that Peter preached in Hebrew and listeners/visitors knew enough Hebrew to follow along. Possible, but not likely, imo I reject that - and say we have a hearing only miracle of the crowd understanding Peter.

We are just on the FIRST DAY.

We have had a pre-Pentecost/breathing on weeks earlier - we have had an initial outpouring, disciples speaking in unknown tongues and visitors hearing in their own languages, and a big sermon by Peter after which the church goes from 120 to 3,000. Wow.

When I was young, as a kid, I saw a presentation like a movie which fascinated me - fascinates me still. The scene was Solomon's Portico, and whether that is scriptural I don't know, it is held by many...

Cloven tongues of fire settling on disciples' heads - sound of a mighty wind - this was SOMETHING!

 

 

 

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

The ELEPHANT metaphor is used because many people speaking about tongues are like the story of "blind men describing the elephant". One touches its tail, says elephant is like a rope, one touches its side says elephant is like a wall, one grabs a leg and says elephant is like a tree...

Even some charismatics, who have supposedly SEEN THE ELEPHANT, have misconceptions that one MUST speak in tongues to be saved, this is erroneous.  Paul asks rhetorically "do all speak with tongues?" and answer assumed to be no - so even at the time when no one disputes tongues took place, not all used this gift.

Again, I plead that this thread NOT be about cessionism vs continuationism. WE want to see how tongues are used IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Interpretation of tongues, as a gift, hasn't even come into play yet - on Day of Pentecost that was more or less automatic.

[Buddy D. Mouse]

Peter stood up with the ELEVEN to start his sermon after some had mocked that the disciples were full of new wine - did that mean Matthias had not been recognized formally as the TWELTH? I do not know. Or is it Peter AND the eleven? I do not want to disparage Matthias, he was obviously a great guy, though the circumstances of being selected one of two and then a LOT to decide seems strange to me. There are some who say Paul would later become a 12th disciple/apostle - but that is not germaine to this OP/thread.

3,000 were pricked to the heart by Peter's sermon and became believers.

I do not think we will ever exhaust everything that happened on Day of Pentecost.  I do not hide the fact that I am continuationist, I just beg that that is not the issue here. All I can do is ask that the whole cessationism vs continuationism issue be set aside as we look at tongues IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

In Acts 8 we have the first instance of laying on of hands to grant the Holy Spirit; but we also have Phillip baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch - water only, no mention of Holy Ghost falling.

In Ephesians it is said there is "one baptism" - yet in Hebrews it speaks of a doctrine of baptisms - plural.

We must look at everything - we must see the entire elephant.

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

In Acts 9 we have Ananias laying hands on the temporarily-blinded Paul (Saul of Tarsus) so that he receives the Holy Ghost.

IN Acts 10 we have Cornelius, a gentile centurion, and those with him have the Holy Ghost fall on them, without the laying on of hands.

Water baptism follows, in the name of Jesus. We do not yet see a Trinitarian formula in water baptism.

Cornelius' household gives us an inkling of two baptisms, in reverse order, Peter's bunch would not withhold water, seeing the Holy Ghost had fallen on them "like us in the beginning"

The gospel has gone to the Gentiles.

We have a baptism in which falls the Holy Ghost, we have water baptism also in the name of Jesus.

We have people speaking in tongues whether they had hands laid on them or not.

 

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

In Acts 19, 12 men who "had not even heard that there be any Holy Ghost" have Paul lay hands on them and speak in tongues.

 

[Buddy D. Mouse]

There are many references to tongues in Paul's letters.

It will be slower-go to get to all of them, whether tongues are a sign to unbelievers/believers, what was the "abuse" of tongues in Corinth, etc.

Rules for giving interpretations - how many can speak - we can still look at much and not have the thread be about cessationism vs continuationism.

I have pretty much covered tongues in Acts and can turn to Paul's letters.