MacArthur and Tongues

[EricH]

Baptism of the Hily Spirit occurs at salvation and is true for all believers. Acts should not be used as a template as it contains historical exceptions that were unique due to the fact that the HS was being sent into the world in a new way

[apothanein kerdos]

No, McAuther spoke against the gifts of the Spirit being valid for today - all of them.

I think you misunderstood him, because from what I've gathered, MacArthur (we've been spelling his name wrong ) doesn't teach such a thing. Here is an example:

Question

In view of the fact that as Christians we are to see ourselves as a part of the body, and we are to be exercising our talents in order to be most effective for the Lord. How should we see ourselves relative to society as far as how can we be most effective as lights and as salt to the earth? Should we view society as also being a part of the body?

Answer

I understand that. You have a two-fold responsibility: you have a responsibility as a believer to the Body of Christ for which you have been gifted. The responsibility you have towards the Body of Christ falls into two categories. You can simplify; maybe it is a bit of an oversimplification but it's not a stretch.

1. First of all, your responsibility to the Body of Christ is expressed in the New Testament "one anothers"--"love one another," "pray for one another," "confess your faults to one another," "rebuke one another," "reprove one another," "exhort one another," "edify one another," "instruct one another," etc., etc., etc. Those are the characteristics of fellowship. Fellowship is "koinonia" the word "koinonos" means "partner"--so you're partner with people. If you are real partner with somebody you have to do all of that. If you are a business partner with someone, you'd exhort them, you'd encourage them, you'd instruct them, you'd deal with all the issues of their life because so much is at stake because you're tied together in this partnership. If you are in a marriage you'd do the same thing back and forth because you understand how a partnership needs that if it is going to flourish.

So in the Church we have that first area of responsibility called "fellowship." The second one is our "spiritual giftedness"--that's different. You have a unique ability to minister to the Body through a gift that the Spirit of God has designed and placed in you. Now every one of us has "the gift"--1 Peter 4:10-11, "As every man has received the gift, so minister the same..." The gifts are divided into two kinds of gifts: speaking gifts and serving gifts. Some of us "speak" our gift, which is primarily a speaking gift: Preaching, Teaching, Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom, Exhortation, Counseling, whatever it might be. For some it is a serving gift: It might be Administration; it might be Helps; it might be Prayer--whatever it might be.

Now, as I see the gift, you have "a gift"--it's just for you--and what the Lord does is: you have these categories of giftedness and the Lord sort of...it's like the colors on a palette...He's going to paint you, so He takes a little of this, and a little of that, and a little of this, and He paints you and you're unique. And when He gives you the gift it isn't that we are all rubber ducks stamped out of a mold and we all "quack" the same way. Everybody who has the gift of teaching doesn't teach the same way. Everybody who has the gift of exhortation doesn't counsel the same way. Everybody who has the gift of helps doesn't help the same way. It's sort of like spiritual fingerprints: there are no two alike, so God takes all the colors in the palette of gifts and blends them together for you.

People have asked me through the years, "What do you think you gift is?" Well, certainly I have a gift for preaching, that's part of what my gift is. I have a gift for knowledge to understand the Word of God. I think part of my gift is administration to lead and direct. Part of my gift is teaching. You know I enjoy the teaching as well the preaching. Many people wouldn't know this but one of the things that I love most is giving. What you have is this sort of this blend of things that comes out "me." That's to the Body--fellowship and that unique design that God has made you.

Now, how do you know what that gift is? Very simple: what do you desire to do when the Spirit directs you, and what do people affirm that you do in His strength? In other words, if I say, "I have the gift of preaching"--and I am done preaching and you all say, "No you don't have the gift of preaching--you had better go back to the list and find another deal." It is not only going to be something that you desire to do, but it is going to be something that causes people to respond, because it is for them--the gift is for them.

2. The second thing then is your responsibility in the world of unredeemed people, and you have singular responsibility, and that is to preach the gospel to every creature, to go everywhere and make disciples: by telling the gospel of Jesus Christ; bringing the gospel to them, and exposing them to the truth of Christ. You do that two ways: you do it by living it, which lays the platform down that makes your testimony believable. By living it and in every opportunity you have expressing it. That's your obligation. That's the only reason you're here really. The only reason the Church has to hang around here and minister; the only reason that you have to be here in the Body is so that we can reach the unconverted--everything else we could do better in heaven, couldn't we? "Well," you say, "I thought we were here, you know, to serve the Lord." Well, but our service is all bound up with sin and it's not what it ought to be. "Well," you say, "We're here to praise the Lord." Yeah, but our praise is imperfect. "Well, we're here to be delivered from sin." Yeah, but sin is still a problem. Everything in Christian experience is better in heaven except one thing, and that's evangelism--you can't do that there. So that's why we're here. The Lord endures all the difficulties in our life as believers in order that we might accomplish the one thing necessary, and that is to live a changed life so the gospel becomes believable and then to speak it clearly to every one with whom we have an opportunity.

Source.

Now, where I think you misunderstood him is that he believes certain gifts (not all) are no longer valid for today because of the context they are found in the Bible.

From the same source:

Question

In Acts 2:4 and 1 Corinthians 12, it talks about the tongue as a spiritual gift. My question is, "How is the tongue supposed to be used today, and how can we misuse it?"

Answer

It is very clear in Acts 2, that God gave to the Apostles the ability to speak in languages that they did not know. As a result, it says, people were hearing in all different kinds of languages, the wonderful works of God. Now, I believe that the purpose of that gift was to establish the fact that a supernatural presence, a supernatural message, was to be proclaimed. It call the attention of everyone who was hearing this.

Some of the people concluded that they were drunk because it was early in the morning, but it collected the people around the phenomena of that wondrous ability to speak in those languages which they didn't know--that was a Holy Spirit miracle. Then when the crowd was all gathered, Peter stood up and preached in a language that everybody understood and in his own native tongue the gospel of Jesus Christ and 3,000 people were saved and the Church was born.

I see in that then that the tongues were a sign, a sign of the miraculous power of God. A sign of supernatural presence which drew the people together and made the message that was preached more powerful, more acceptable, more authentic in their eyes. So, in that occasion we see it clearly as a sign that God was speaking and when God got their attention, then came the message of the gospel. By the way, if you follow that through, I believe "tongues" probably occurred in Acts 8 even though it doesn't say that, but where you have the church moving out into Samaria, and then in chapter 10, definitely occurred when the church moves to the Gentiles, and then later on in 19, when John the Baptist's disciples were brought into the church, you have it again.

I believe in the Book of Acts the reason that you have the "tongues" repeated again is because every time the next dimension of people were added to the church it was important that they have the same phenomena so that they would know that they were being added to the same body. So that the sign given of the Day of Pentecost was repeated at each new phase of the church.

Do you remember that the gospel was to go forth and they were to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the world? When the gospel came to the Samaritans there was the same phenomena; when it came to the Gentiles there was the same phenomena; when those who followed John the Baptist were brought in, they saw the same phenomena. Peter came back and reported (you remember) to the council that "on the Gentiles came the same thing that came on us." So as the Lord built the church they had this same sign, the same supernatural sign so that the Jews would not think that they received something special that Samaritans and Gentiles didn't get. So, it was a sign gift.

Now you come into 1 Corinthians 12-14, it is still a sign gift but it was being perverted in the Corinthian Church, and I believe that it was being mixed and mingled with a lot of ecstatic speech that was a part of the pagan religion of that day. It was still (if it was used properly) to be a sign gift.

Paul, then in 1 Corinthians 12-14 regulates it. He says how it is to function, he first of all introduces it as a gift in chapter 12. He tells at the end of chapter 12 that it is an unimportant gift. In chapter 13 he says "love" is much more important. In chapter 14 "edification" is much more important. He says, "Women are never to exercise it. It is never to more than two or three people. It's never to be without interpretation." But it doesn't change the nature of it--it was a sign gift--a sign of the presence of God and a sign that God was about to speak so that when the speaker spoke they would know it was from God.

In that sense it is a sign that we don't need any more because when a speaker speaks today we know whether he is from God or not by how he is consistent with Scripture. I don't need "signs and wonders" to attest to a prophet--if he sticks with the Book I know he speaks for God. But in that day when there was no New Testament to compare him with, God gave, as it says in 2 Corinthians, "the gifts of an apostle, and signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds" (12:12).

So, "tongues" was a sign gift (and I am giving you a condensed version, again you can get the book on "Tongues." I hate to keep saying that, but it there available if you want one--pick one up "on me."). But the gift of "tongues" was a sign gift.

Now, I believe it has ceased. I believe that it has passed away. 1 Corinthians 13, "Whether there be tongues they shall...(and it uses a reflective form of the verb) . . . cease by themselves." I believe when the end of the Apostolic Era came--tongues ceased. I believe that you can chronicle through the history of the church the cessation of tongues--they didn't exist, except in aberrant forms.

It was revived in the early part of the 1900's and brought back in as if it were some legitimate gift--it is my conviction that it has no place in the church today--no place. It was part of the "Signs of an Apostle," such as healing, and the gift of miracles, which I see as "dunamis" (Greek) or the gift of "power"--that is, to cast out demons on the spot--at will.

So, I think that it was one of those temporary gifts that passed away, was used to signify the spokesman for God who were speaking, so that the people would know they spoke for God, which we now know by whether they stick with the Word.

Now you say, "Now, what is it that people are doing today?" Well, I think, the people who are speaking in what they call "Tongues" could be explained in many ways:

1. I think much of it is learned behavior, just learned behavior--they learned how to do it. They are in a group that does it, in fact, I have heard it in many places around the country, I have listened to it on tape. When I was working on the book I got involved in studying some of the reports of it, and it is very interesting that much of it is the same language and the same repeated symbols--it is a non-language, but it is very often learned behavior.

2. It can also be explained as sort of mental perocisms (sp) where you sort of flip out in a sort of self-hypnotic situations.

3. Some of it can be demonic.

There are other explanations, but I see that it has ceased from a Biblical viewpoint, and has no function in the church today.

However, I think it misrepresents his position to say he was speaking against all gifts, because he wasn't. I do not agree that tongues is no longer valid for today, but I do believe it is highly abused. When we equate it to baptism of the Holy Spirit, we have abused this gift. I also do not think it is to be done in servies and that if used, it is only to speak a language that is foreign to oneself but native to those around.

[nebula]

Nebula,

You said, "No, McAuther spoke against the gifts of the Spirit being valid for today - all of them." Could you referrence that for me?

It was over the radio back in the 80's. It would be a little difficult.

Baptism of the Hily Spirit

Oh, there's a good tease in there if I could think of it....

[apothanein kerdos]

Baptism of the Hily Spirit occurs at salvation and is true for all believers. Acts should not be used as a template as it contains historical exceptions that were unique due to the fact that the HS was being sent into the world in a new way

[nebula]

I do not agree that tongues is no longer valid for today,

OK - I'm glad to hear that!

I also do not think it is to be done in servies and that if used, it is only to speak a language that is foreign to oneself but native to those around.

My brother was talking about his church service last Sunday where the pastor had them all speaking in tongues at each other and then asking God to give them an interpretation for the tongues given. I wish I could repeat all he said about it. But he and the others gained a lot from the experience.

[apothanein kerdos]

I do not agree that tongues is no longer valid for today,

OK - I'm glad to hear that!

I also do not think it is to be done in servies and that if used, it is only to speak a language that is foreign to oneself but native to those around.

My brother was talking about his church service last Sunday where the pastor had them all speaking in tongues at each other and then asking God to give them an interpretation for the tongues given. I wish I could repeat all he said about it. But he and the others gained a lot from the experience.

I promises you that Biblically it was not beneficial. It violates scripture, Paul says that no more than one or two are to speak and only those with the gift are to speak.

They may think they had an experience, and I'm sure they did, but it was not one given by God. I know that is harsh and seems judgemental, but when something violates the Bible, it simply cannot be good or true.

[EricH]

Here is a summary of some teaching I did recently on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit:

1. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is the placing of the believer into the body of Christ and into Christ Himself:

For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 NASB

2. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a one-time event occurring at the moment of salvation - notice the passage aboe says that "all were baptized" and made to drink of one Spirit

3. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a universal experience for all believers

For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Galatians 3:26-27 NASB

See also the 1 Corinthians passage cited above

The question remains, what about the Acts passages that seem to indicate something different:

And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.

Acts 2:1-4 NASB

Ten days afte Jesus ascended, 120 of the faithful were in the upper room praying. there was a rusing of wind that filled the room and separate "tongues of fire" rested on each one. They then began to speak in other languages as the Spirit enabled. Later in the day, Peter was explaining what had happened to a larger crowd. He referred to it as the "gift of the Holy Spirit" and urged those listening to repent and receive the Hiloy Spirit (Acts 2:38). 3000 responded and were water baptized (Acts 2:41). The 300 do not seem to have experienced the same outworkings as those in the upper room. The difference seems to be that the 120 in the upper room were believers who were receiving the Holy Spirit who was being sent into the world in this new way for the first time. The 3000 were unbelievers who simultaneously received salvation and the Holy Spirit together. There was a difference in their historical circumstances. The 120 could not have received the Holy Spirit until after Pentecost. The 3000 came to faith after pentecost and received the whole package.

And Philip went down to the city of Samaria and began proclaiming Christ to them. And the multitudes with one accord were giving attention to what was said by Philip, as they heard and saw the signs which he was performing. For in the case of many who had unclean spirits, they were coming outof them shouting with a loud voice; and many who had been paralyzed and lame were healed. And there was much rejoicing in that city. Now there was a certain man named Simon, who formerly was practicing magic in the city, and astonishing the people of Samaria, claiming to be someone great; and they all, from smallest to greatest, were giving attention to him, saying, "This man is what is called the Great Power of God." And they were giving him attention because he had for a long time astonished them with his magic arts. But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike. And even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip; and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was constantly amazed. Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit.

Acts 8:5-17 NASB

Here we have an example of Philip preaching in Samaria and many responding and being baptized. The apostles then send Peter and John to validate the experience. Why?

1. These believers were Samaritans and up until this time the Jews had no dealings with Samaritans. They were an unknow quantity.

2. There was an age old blood feud between the Samaritans and the Jews. This rivalry had lastred for centuries and might have continued right into the new church with a Samaritan and a Jewish branch.

Possibly God withheld the giving of the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans so that 2 leading Jewish apostles could come down and validate what had happened and by laying on of their hands, acknowledge the Samaritans into the church.

And it came about that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found some disciples, and he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said to him, "No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit." And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" And they said, "Into John's baptism." And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus." And when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying. And there were in all about twelve men.

Acts 19:1-7 NASB

The "disciples' here, were not believers, but were followers of John the Baptist who believed John's message of repentancde and the coming messiah, but had not been fully converted to faith in Jesus. They had received a partial message, but were unaware of the salvation that was available in Jesus.

We do not get God on the "installment plan". When we receive Christ, we get all of God including the Holy Spirit.

Things like speaking in tongues and healing are not signs that a person has been baptized in the Holy Spirit. They are Spiritual gifts that are given to some believers. I do not agree with MacArther that they have ceased.

[nebula]

I promises you that Biblically it was not beneficial. It violates scripture, Paul says that no more than one or two are to speak and only those with the gift are to speak.

They may think they had an experience, and I'm sure they did, but it was not one given by God. I know that is harsh and seems judgemental, but when something violates the Bible, it simply cannot be good or true.

No - it wasn't the entire congregation speaking to the entire congregation - it was done in pairs. My brother and another spoke in tongues to each other. After the pastor encouraged them to pray for interpretation and they did, my brother gave a prophetic word to the one he was sharing with. He said something to the effect of, "I don't know if it was an interpretation or not, but it was a good word!"

Honestly, there would be a lot less abuses of tongues if more pastors gave training like this.

[IslandRose]

. After the pastor encouraged them to pray for interpretation and they did, my brother gave a prophetic word to the one he was sharing with. He said something to the effect of, "I don't know if it was an interpretation or not, but it was a good word!"

See, this is what I don't understand. Do I have this right? One guy "spoke in tongues." Your brother prayed for an interpretation and then told the guy a "prophetic word, " but then he says...."I don't know if it was an interpretation or not....?"

Was it an interpretation of the tongues or just a really good word from your brother? How can you be sure that any of those people were actually giving interpretations. I guess my Baptist brain just has a hard time understanding this....

[nebula]

My brother spoke in tongues to the other person and after praying for interpretation had a "word" (as we call it) to give to the other person.