Worship-07A-Spirituality

WANDERING SOUL, LONELY HEART &
THE SIDE-TRACKED CHURCH

WORSHIP THE FIRST-CENTURY WAY

Spirituality or Religious Fix?

Great Theologians

About 450, AUGUSTINE - PRE-CATHOLIC: "Suppose we advise all our brethren not to teach their children [to speak their native language by example] because on the outpouring of the Holy Spirit the apostles immediately began to speak the languages of every race; and warn every one who has not had a like experience [to learn their own language] that he need not consider himself a Christian, or may at least doubt whether he has yet received the Holy Spirit? No." (On Christian Doctrine, Preface, Point 5)

About 1270, THOMAS AQUINAS - CATHOLIC: "Both Paul and the other apostles were divinely instructed in the languages of all nations sufficiently for the requirements of the teaching of the faith." (Summa Theologica, Secunda Secundae Partis)

About 1536 and 1543, JOHN CALVIN - REFORMED CHURCHES:� "Those who, rejecting Scripture, imagine that they have some peculiar way of penetrating to God, are to be deemed not so much under the influence of error as madness.� For certain giddy men have lately appeared who, while they make a great display of the superiority of the spirit....The office of the Spirit promised to us is not to form new and unheard-of revelations....What can be plainer than this prohibition - 'let not prayers or thanksgivings be offered up in public except in the vernacular tongue'....We see, then, how Satan sports among them with impunity"� (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, 9:1; and Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle, I Corinthians 14:16).

1674, JOHN BUNYAN - BAPTIST: "But the devil, that he might...render the scriptures also odious and low, telling them of the 'scriptures' within; which Christ never taught, nor yet his disciples:� But they...have given themselves over rather to follow the suggestions of the devil than the holy scriptures....But this design the devil carries on by pretending to show them a more excellent way which they may attain to...from the light within them."� (THE WORKS OF JOHN BUNYAN, VOL. II, pg. 136, "Some Gospel Truths Opened According to Scriptures").

1861 and 1866, CHARLES SPURGEON - BAPTIST:� "But do you know the effect of an experimental [experiential] minister?...This is their style:� 'Except thou art daily feeling the utter rottenness of thine heart....Except thou abidest on the dunghill...thou art no child of God.'� Who told you that?....Those who pray unintelligible prayers, prayers in a foreign tongue, prayers which they do not understand: we know without a moment's discussion...the prayer which is not even understood cannot be a prayer in the Spirit, for even the man's own spirit does not enter into it, how then can the Spirit of God be there?" (Sermons in the Metropolitan Pulpit, pg. 173, and pg. 615.

�� I lift up the arms of my heart to you, oh God.� I reach for you with the hands of my spirit and I touch you.� You are so delightful, grand as the glowing morning sun.� Even when it is red before a brewing storm, you say, "It's just me.� I'm still shining. �I'll be back right after the storm."� You are my forever God.

�� My brother-in-law, Jim Maxwell, used to brag in his youth that he was descended from Sir Maxwellus, the noble Brit with Roman citizenship.� The family has yet to find any evidence of a historic figure who even vaguely resembled such a person or even carried that name.

�� So it was that a few years ago when he went to Scotland determined to find the Maxwell castle, the family all replied, "Sure, Jim.� Yeah.� Right," in no uncertain derogatory terms.� Then the unbelievable happened.� He found it.� The Maxwell castle.� It was triangular in shape and built of red stone.� It had no roof, and trees were growing inside it.� Nevertheless, it was the Maxwell castle.�

�� My sister said that when he went "inside" of "his" castle, he wandered around kind of in a trance as though he was having "a religious experience," as she termed it.��

�� The reference that my sister made to the "religious experience" actually does express what people today seem to be searching for in their religion:� An experience.� Being able to reach the unreachable.� Being able to experience the unbelievable.� Recently a term has been coined to explain it:� "experiential religion."

�� Society in the industrial and information-age countries feel it has experienced about as much as it can accomplish for now.� But it wants more.� Having triumphed over nature, electronics, and the mind, today's society now strains to triumph over the spirit.� This triumph, they call "spiritualism" which is reached through the "religious experience."

�� Many people go from church to church searching, and feel they all lack spiritual dimension, an intimate relationship with the divine, and an intimate relationship with the congregation.� Further, in our world of instant everything, they want it right now.� Some finally give up searching the churches and just stay home to try finding spirituality in solitude.

�� In 1997, the Vancouver Sun in an article regarding spirituality, quoted someone as saying, "One must 'die before you die' by replacing human qualities with divine ones....emphasis on spiritual experiences....not afraid of spiritual ecstasy... visions...while whirling in mystical dance."

�� This is a description of Sufism where, among other things, worshippers "dance in exaltation while pointing one hand to heaven and one to earth."� Followers also believe "music carries one's soul into the divine presence," and chanting the 99 names of God melodiously, "brings peace to anybody who listens."� It was their effort to reach spirituality. [1]

�� The same year, the Associated Press carried an article about people who "jump up and down, stomp the dirt and throw themselves to the ground.� Delirious with religious fervor, they shout, 'God!'....The chants become louder and faster....It is worship....the idea is to prepare oneself for God."� It is a description of Muslim worship.� This was their effort to reach spirituality. [2]����

�� The Hindu religion that is permeating much of North American thinking, suggests meditating on the syllable OM.� THE UPANISHADS the chapter on "Prasna" says:�

�� "The syllable OM...when it is fully understood and meditation is therefore rightly directed...whether he be awake, dreaming, or sleeping the dreamless sleep, and attains to Brahman.� By virtue of a greater understanding he attains to the celestial sphere....The sage, with the help of OM, reaches Brahman, the fearless, the undecaying, the immortal!"� This was the Hindu effort to reach spirituality. [3]

�� In THE TEACHINGS OF THE COMPASSIONATE BUDDHA, the chapter on becoming a monk says this:

�� "With the pure Heavenly Eye...he sees beings as they pass away from one form of existence and take shape in another....To him, thus knowing, thus seeing, the heart is set free from the deadly taint of lusts, is set free from the deadly taint of becomings....Rebirth has been destroyed.� The higher life has been fulfilled.";� This was the Buddhist effort to reach spirituality. [4]

�� The ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA states, "references to ecstatic speech and oracular pronouncements can be found, for example, in the classical writers; and in the [ancient] Greek language...the phrase lalein heterais glossais referred to glossolalia.� The utterances of the Pythian priestess of Apollo at Delphi may be considered examples of it.� Various observations of the phenomenon have also been made in peoples of primitive cultures."� This was the Greek effort to reach spirituality. [5]

�� The early church historian, Eusebius, reported that late in the second century, a man named Montanus claimed to be so spiritualistic that some even called him the Holy Spirit incarnate.� In Book V, chapter XVI, Eusebius reported that Montanus...

�� "...was carried away in spirit, and wrought up into a certain kind of frenzy and irregular ecstasy, raving, and speaking, and uttering strange things....he excited two others, females, and filled them with the spirit of delusion, so that they also spake like the former, in a kind of extatic frenzy, out of all season, and in a manner strange and novel....

�� "Theodotus, one of the first that was carried away by their prophecy, as it was called....as if he should at some time be taken up and received into the heavens, and who falling into trances, gave himself up to the spirit of deception." [6]

�� In chapter XVII, Eusebius also reported what the historian Miltiades, a contemporary of Montanus, wrote about this supposed spiritual phenomenon:

�� "But the false prophet is carried away by a vehement ecstasy, accompanied by want of all shame and fear.� Beginning, indeed, with a designed ignorance, and terminating, as beforesaid, in involuntary madness.�

�� "They will never be able to show that any of the Old or any of the New Testament, were thus violently agitated and carried away in spirit.� Neither will they be able to boast that Agabus, or Judas, or Silas, or the daughters of Philip, or Ammias in Philadelphia, or Quandratus, or others that do not belong to them, ever acted in this way.� This was a "Christian" effort to reach spirituality. [7]

�� In addition to the Montanists mentioned above who were disfellowshipped from the church about 175 AD, speaking in tongues revived in Christian advocates among mendicant friars in the 1200s, the little prophets of Cevennes, the Camisards, the Jansenists and the Irvingites.� It was revived again in the 1600s among both Catholics and protestants, and again in the 1900s.� All are efforts to reach spirituality.

�� I once read a book written in praise of "tongues" in which the author struggled to touch God.� He finally prayed that he needed another language in which to praise him and say he loved him.� In fact, he needed a thousand tongues with which to worship God.� Later in his book he said that, as people grow in their worship of God, "sooner or later" they will speak in tongues. [8]

�� At this point, we will look at spirituality as an act of public worship within a congregational assembly.� First, because it appeared in other world religions, we will investigate the phenomenon of "tongues."

�� God, I had no idea that other religions spoke in tongues.� This is confusing.� I thought it was only a Christian thing.� And I certainly never heard the early church didn't like it.� No one ever told me that.� I do want to please you, God.� Please be patient with me while I learn.

First Occurrences in the Early Church

�� In fairness, we will cover every verse in the New Testament on tongues.� The first is a reference by Jesus himself just before he returned to heaven.� This is what was said in Mark 16:15-16 in Jesus' own words:

�� " 'Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation.� Whoever believers and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.� And these signs will accompany those who believe:� In my name they will drive out demons, they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.' "

�� We know from 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 that not everyone who became a Christian performed all the signs listed above.� This phenomenon of tongues was given equality with picking up poisonous snakes and drinking deadly poison without being killed.� Therefore, there was as much a predominance of these latter two signs as speaking in tongues.�

�� Further, Jesus did not say "unknown" tongues; he said "new" tongues.� In every instance of the word "tongues" occurring in the New Testament, it is from a Greek word, "glossa," meaning "languages."

�� The first time this occurred is recorded in Acts 2.� Verse 4 says, "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other [not unknown] tongues as the Spirit enabled them."� �� Who were the "them" who began to speak in other tongues?� Acts 1:15 says there were 120 present - both men and women - when a replacement was made for Judas' office as apostle (1:13-15).� Have you ever heard there were 120 people present and therefore 120 received the gift of tongues because it says "all" of them?

�� Yet, Acts 2:1 says, "When the day of Pentecost came...."� This was clearly another day.� Otherwise the day would have been placed at the beginning of the account of the 120.� Further reading will give other evidence as to who was there.

�� In verse 3, the word "they" occurs, but still with no identification.� Verse 4 refers to "them," still with no identification.� Verse 7 gets more specific, for it refers to "they" and "them" as "these MEN who are speaking" and as "Galileans."� Verse 14 narrows down "they" and "them" and "these men" even more, referring to Peter with the Eleven.�

�� Then Peter specifically tells what "these men" were doing.

�� What were the tongues they were speaking?� Verse 8 says "Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language."� There we have it in plain black and white.�

�� We must realize that Peter was not the only one who preached that day.� His sermon was recorded, but the others preached too.� Everyone heard "all these men" speaking in their own language, not just Peter.� Peter stood up with the Eleven (verse 14), and in verse 37 the people "said to Peter and the other apostles."

�� Since we know 3,000 were baptized that day, they surely preached to anywhere from 10,000 to perhaps even 100,000.� For one apostle's voice to carry to even 1,000 without a sound system like we have today would be a great fete.

�� How many languages were represented in the audience that day?� The regions represented were 15 if you count them in verses 9-11.� This gives one of three possibilities for the languages spoken that day.

1.�� The simplest is that each apostle spoke one of twelve languages, and three others repeated their sermon in the other languages.

2.�� Or, some of the regions mentioned had languages that were similar.� For instance, Parthia, Media, Elam and Mesopotamia were at various times parts of the same empire:� The Babylonian Empire, then the Persian Empire, then the Grecian Empire, and finally the Roman Empire.� Also, Phrygia and Pamphylia were very small provinces next to each other in one corner of southern Turkey.��

3.�� Or, we know that the Apostle Peter wrote to the churches in Capadocia, Pontus and Asia (all in Turkey) in the Greek language.� The Apostle Paul wrote to the church in Rome in the Greek language.� Paul also wrote to Titus on the isle of Crete in the Mediterranean in the Greek language.� Both Paul and the Apostle John wrote several churches in the province of Asia in the Greek language.

�� This first instance of tongues occurred when the first Jews were baptized into Christ in Jerusalem.� The next time tongues is mentioned is in Caesarea on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea when the first Gentiles were baptized into Christ in Acts 10.�

�� What occurred first is that a Gentile named Cornelius who was morally good but still not saved was told by an angel in a vision that he should send for a Jew named Peter.� The next day, Peter had a vision where God told him to break a specific Jewish law ~ to eat forbidden meat.� Right after that Cornelius' messengers accompanied Peter to Cornelius' house.�

�� But before Peter began preaching the gospel, he said, " 'I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right.� You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all' " (10:34-36).

�� At the end of his sermon, "while Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.� The circumcised believers [JEWS] who had come with Peter were ASTONISHED that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out EVEN ON THE GENTILES" (10:44-45).

�� How did they know this?� Because the Jews "heard them [GENTILES] speaking in tongues and praising God" (10:46).� The word "heard" is from the Greek "akouo" which means to harken with understanding.� This "akouo" is the same word used in John 8:26 and 40 referring to Jesus harkening to Jehovah's words, and in 2 Timothy 2:2 referring to Timothy harkening to Paul's words.

�� So, the Jews not only heard a sound coming from the Gentiles' mouths, but they understood the sound - recognizable words.� They knew that they were words of praise.� When the Twelve preached on the Day of Pentecost back in Acts 2, their words were condemnation for crucifying Jesus, and exhortation to repent.� They were not words praising God other than honoring his will.

�� Furthermore, when Peter went to the other apostles to explain himself for baptizing people who the Jews considered "untouchables," he said, "As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them, as he HAD ON US AT THE BEGINNING" (Acts 11:15).� When was the only other time tongues occurred?� Acts 2 says it was at the beginning of the church.� And who had the gift of speaking in tongues?� The apostles.� Therefore, these people had the same ability ~ to speak in the native languages of other people.

�� Interestingly, they were still lacking something important that they had to do.� The Apostle Peter announced to his Jewish friends, " 'Can anyone keep these people [Gentiles] from being baptized with water?� They have received the Holy Spirit just as we [Jews] have.'� So he ORDERED that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ."

�� Why would they need the gift of languages?� So the Gentiles could go to their own people and preach the gospel.� That was part of Jesus' command.� "Go into ALL the world and preach the Gospel to ALL creation" (Mark 16:15).

�� The third time tongues is mentioned is in Acts 19 in Ephesus. Ephesus is a province in Turkey, across the Aegean Sea from Greece.� Acts 18:24-28 explains how a Jew named Apollos was preaching there only the baptism of John.� Priscilla and Aquilla taught him "the way of God more adequately."� Then, instead of correcting what he had taught in Ephesus, he went to Achaia in southern Greece.

�� So Paul went to Ephesus.� When he arrived and found these believers, Paul asked them, " 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?'� They answered, 'No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit' " (19:2).� They went on to explain that they had only been baptized into John's baptism.� Paul replied, "'John's baptism was a baptism of repentance' " (19:4).� Were they saved yet?

�� "On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus" (19:5).� Why didn't Paul baptize them into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit like Jesus commanded in Mark 16:15?� Because they had no idea who the Holy Spirit was.� So Paul gave them the Holy Spirit separately.� Then they received the proof they had because "they spoke in tongues and prophesied" (19:6).� The word "spoke" here is from the Greek word "laleo" meaning to tell something as in a conversation.� Now these Ephesians understood the Holy Spirit.� (More on the relationship of tongues with prophesying later.)

�� Could just anyone receive the Holy Spirit separately?� No.� Apostles had to be present.� Back in Acts 8, a deacon named Philip went to Samaria, a province in the middle of Palestine, to preach.� He even performed some miracles.� But, keep in mind, the church was probably only a couple years old.� None of the New Testament has been written yet.� Preachers were having to hear the Apostles and then go on and teach what they remembered.� Sometimes even the well meaning were not getting everything straight, just as Apollos above hadn't.

�� When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that even Samaritans had believed in Jesus, these apostles "sent Peter and John to them.� When they [apostles Peter and John] arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.� Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit" (8:14-17).�

�� Even Simon the sorcerer recognized that the apostles had to be present for this to occur.� Acts 8:18 says "Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the APOSTLES' hands."

�� Note, also, that Jesus told his "apostles he had chosen" (Acts 1:2), "John baptized with water, but in a few days you [the apostles] will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."� Baptism of the Holy Spirit only occurred two times in the New Testament, to the first Jews ~ the Apostles on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and to the first Gentiles - the household of Cornelius (Acts 11:15-18).

�� God, I didn't know the gifts of the Holy Spirit were so intermingled with the work for the Apostles.� There's so much more for me to learn.� I'm trying, God.� I'm trying.

General References in the New Testament

�� The word translated "tongues" is from the Greek word "glossa."� We are investigating every scripture in the New Testament which uses this word "glossa."� We must keep in mind that "glossa" refers to words the tongue forms that are both good and bad.

�� Here are the scriptures which refer to "glossa" as being bad.� Romans 3:13-14 says, " 'Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit.� The poison of vipers is on their lips.� Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.' "� If tongues is unknown, how would anyone know the words were deceitful, bitter, and cursing?

�� James, Jesus' brother, said in his letter that if anyone considers himself religious and doesn't control his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless (James 1:26).� Elsewhere he said the tongue is evil full of boasting that, like a spark in a dry forest, can create a destructive fire.� The tongue is restless and deadly poison and can corrupt a person (James 3:5-8).�� If tongues is unknown, how could anyone know someone was boasting, and how could it corrupt anyone?

�� The Apostle Peter said that the tongue was evil and deceitful, and if we expect to live very long, we must learn to control it and not insult even our enemies.� If tongues is unknown, how could our enemies know they were being insulted?

�� The Apostle John warned that we are not to just tell people we love them with our tongue, but to prove it by our actions and telling the truth (1 John 3:18).� If tongues is unknown, how could people know someone was a hypocrite if they didn't know their words were about love, and how could they know they were lying?� John said we were not to just love "with words."� This term is from the Greek "logos" which means logic and reason.� If tongues is unknown, how could they be spoken with logic and reason?

�� Some people have said that tongues is gibberish.� The Bible covers this under the word "babble."� In Acts 17:18 Paul tried to get the Greeks in Athens to believe in the one true God.� The philosophers who heard him said he was babbling as he seemed to be advocating some foreign god or gods.� If tongue is babbling, how could these philosophers draw any conclusion about what Paul was saying?

�� Paul wrote to his protege, "Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care.� Turn away from godless chatter, and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith" (1 Timothy 6:20).� He wrote him a second time with this same warning:� "Avoid godless chatter, because they who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly" (2 Timothy 2:16).� The word "godless chatter" is translated "vain babblings" in the King James Version, and is from the Greek word "keno-phonia" which means empty sounds.�

�� Others will say that tongues refers to groanings, and cite Romans 8:26, "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness.� We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express."� But the word translated "groans" is from the Greek "stenagmos" which means to sigh.� Sighs are not words.

�� God, I never connected the gift of tongues with other uses of the tongue in the Bible.� There's really a connection.� I had no idea.� Keep being patient, God.� I'm trying.� I really do want to please you.

Paul's Letter to the Corinthian Church

��INTRODUCTORY MESSAGE

�� The reason this letter was written is pivotal to understanding.� This was not a nice letter.� It was not fun for the Christians in this congregation to read.� Why?

�� Some people from Corinth reported to Paul both by letter and in person that the church there was quarrelling (1:10-11).� Paul said they were acting like babies (3:1), were still worldly, (3:3), and one man was taking pride over another (4:6).�

�� Paul said he had to write to them to "shame them as children because some had become arrogant" (4:14, 18).� People in the congregation were being boastful (5:6) which was, of course, hurting others.� Although they were now Christians, their lives were still full of malice and wickedness (5:8).� They were even being enslaved by otherwise permissible things (6:12).

�� This congregation was "in the middle of a crisis" (7:26).� Why?� Because people were seeking their own good instead of the good of others.� They were acting like the word of God had originated with them (14:36).� As a result, their meetings were doing more harm than good (11:17)!

�� Paul wrote this letter to avoid making a painful visit to them (2 Corinthians 2:1).� He was greatly distressed and anguished in heart, and had shed many tears over them (2 Corinthians 2:4).

�� His letter is divided up by subject.� He wrote about church harmony first.� Then in 7:1 he said, "Now for the matters you wrote about."� They realized things were terribly wrong, and some of them wrote to Paul out of desperation.

�� Paul's reply to their letter is divided into two major parts.� Chapters 7 - 11:16 covers their private Christian lives.� In 7:1 he talks about marriage, beginning 8:1 he talks about eating meat offered to idols, beginning 9:1 he talks about supporting himself so he didn't have to take payment from them, beginning 10:1 he talks about purchasing meat at the market that had been offered to idols.

�� Finally, beginning 11:1 Paul talks about women praying and prophesying "because of the [example of] the angels" (11:10).� Since angels delivered their prophecies to individuals and not to groups, Paul is talking about the woman's relationship to her husband and others in the home.��

�� (Keep in mind that Paul did not number his sentences or write his letters with chapter divisions.� This was done over a millennium later by an uninspired man.)� So finally, in verse 11:17 Paul begins talking about their public meetings.� He introduces the subject thusly:� "In the FOLLOWING directives I have no praise for you, for your MEETINGS do more harm than good.� In the first place...."

�� In fact, all the following verses refer to their meetings.� Besides the one above, 11:33 says, "when you come together...." 12:28 says, "in the church, God has appointed...." 14:6 says, "If I come to you and speak.... 14:23 says, "So if the whole church comes together...." 4:26 says, "When you come together...." 14:33 says, "As in all the congregations...." 15:12 says "but if it is preached.... and 16:1 says "Now about the collection...."

�� So beginning here to the end of the letter, Paul talks about what Christians should do in their meetings, not in private.� Beginning 11:17 he talks about keeping the Lord's Supper in the assembly, beginning 12:1 he talks about spiritual gifts used in the assembly ("message of wisdom...message of knowledge...healing...prophecy...tongues...interpretation" (12:8-10).

�� Beginning 13:1 he talks about love being superior to tongues, beginning 14:1 he talks about tongues in the assembly, beginning 14:26 he talks about orderliness in the assembly, beginning 15:1 he talks about what they must preach regarding the resurrection of the dead "But if it is preached...." 15:12).� He closes his letter talking about collections in the assembly (16:1).

�� God, I adore you.� You are my life and light.� You are my reason for living.� I long to see you some day face to face.� I just wish I could express what I feel.

ALL MENTIONS OF TONGUES

�� Tongues is mentioned several times in both chapters 12 and 13.� First, where did they get their spiritual gifts?� We learned earlier the apostles had to be present to give them.� In 1:6 Paul says "our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you.� Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift.&"

�� Paul's testimony had to be confirmed or proven to be true.� He could have come from anywhere claiming to have been inspired by God.� How did he confirm his words?� The same way Jesus did.� He did many miraculous signs "that you may believe."� In fact, in Paul's second letter to the Corinthians he referred to "the things that mark an apostle - signs, wonders and miracles" done among them.� Therefore, when Paul was with them to start the congregation in Corinth he gave them spiritual gifts.

�� In chapter 12, verse 10 Paul said some had received miraculous powers, some prophecy, some distinguishing between spirits, some speaking in "different kinds of tongues."� The word translated "kinds of" is the Greek word "genos" which means race, nationality.�

�� One other gift was the interpretation of tongues.� This word translated "interpretation" is from the Greek word "hermeneia" which means an explanation, a commentary.� It is the same word used in Luke 24:27 where, after Jesus' resurrection from the dead he appeared to some men and, "beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself."

�� It is also the same word used in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament centuries earlier, where the Law of Moses was read to the Jews, with the Levites "making it clear and giving the meaning so that the people could understand what was being read" (Nehemiah 8:8).� More on this later.

�� In 12:28, Paul listed various gifts.� As he began his list he said, "first of all...."� The last gift he listed was tongues.� The term "first of all" is from the Greek "proton" which refers to order in rank or order of importance.� The least important gift was "different kinds of tongues."� This term is from the Greek "genos" indicating race or nationality, not babbling or gibberish.

�� In 12:30, Paul asked, "Do all speak in tongues?"� The word translated "speak" is from the Greek "laleo" which means to tell something.� How could they tell something to people if they were speaking in an unknown language?

�� Chapter 13 only mentions tongues twice.� Verse one is critical and almost always misapplied.� "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal."

�� What are the tongues of angels?� Many people say it is gibberish, babbling.� But what does the Bible say the tongues of angels is?� Just what language do angels speak in?� Below are all the times in the Bible an angel spoke on earth.

Genesis 16:7-12 an angel spoke to Hagar and was understood by her.� Genesis 16:3 says Hagar was Egyptian.

Genesis 19:10-21 an angel spoke to Lot's family and was understood.� Genesis 11:31 says they were Chaldean (Babylonian).

Genesis 21:14-18 an angel spoke to Hagar again and was understood.� Genesis 16:3 says Hagar was Egyptian.

Genesis 22:1-12 an angel spoke to Abraham and was understood.� Genesis 11:31 says Abraham was Chaldean (Babylonian).

Exodus 3:1-3 an angel spoke to Moses and was understood.� Exodus 1:15, 2:9-10 says Moses was raised as an Egyptian.

Judges 13:2-17 an angel spoke to Samson's parents & was understood.� Judges 13:1 says they were Israelites (who spoke Hebrew).

2 Kings 1:3-4 an angel spoke to Elijah and was understood.� 1 Kings 17:1 says Elijah was an Israelite (who spoke Hebrew).

Daniel 8:16-25; 9:21-27 an angel spoke to Daniel & was understood.� Daniel 1:1-4 says Daniel learned the Babylonian language.

Luke 1:8-20 an angel spoke to Zechariah and was understood.� Luke 1:4 says Zechariah was an Israelite (who now spoke Aramaic).

Luke 1:28-38 an angel spoke to Mary and was understood.� Luke 3:24f and other places say Mary was an Israelite (who now spoke Aramaic).

Luke 2:8-12 angels spoke to shepherds and were understood.� Luke 2:4 says the shepherds were Israelites (who now spoke Aramaic).

Matthew 28:1-7 an angel spoke to Mary Magdalene & others and was understood.� A map reveals that Magdala was in the province of Galilee in Palestine where the Jews lived (who now spoke Aramaic).

Acts 10:1-8 an angel spoke to Cornelius and was understood.� Acts 10:1 says Cornelius was Italian.

Acts 12:5-10 an angel spoke to Peter and was understood.� John 1:44 says Peter was from Capernaum in the province of Galilee in Palestine where the Jews lived (who now spoke Aramaic).

Revelation 5:2, etc. an angel spoke to John and was understood.� Matthew 4:18-21 says John was from the province of Galilee in Palestine where the Jews lived (who now spoke Aramaic).� However, he wrote about the vision in Greek.

�� So, what language do angels speak in?� Our examples give us Egyptian, Chaldean, Hebrew, Babylonian, Aramaic, Italian, and Greek.� Therefore, angels speak in the language of whoever they are speaking to.� They do not speak in unintelligible gibberish.

�� Finally, 13:8 says love will go on forever, but prophecies will cease and tongues will be stilled.� The word translated "stilled" is from the Greek word "pauomai" which means to stop, to make an end.� In Luke 8:24, for instance, it was used to Jesus causing the storm to cease.

�� God, I always wanted to talk angelically.� It never occurred to me angels speak the languages already spoken on earth.� Isn't there some special language I can speak to you in?

Continue Next Page

Endnotes for This Page

[1].� Vancouver Sun reprinted in The Windsor Star, Todd, Douglas, "The Rapture of Islam's Sufis," August 23, 1997.

[2].� Shadid, Anthony, The Windsor Star, "Islam's Changing Face," The Associated Press, January 25, 1997.

[3].� Prabhavananda, Swami and Frederick Manchester, editors, The Upanishads:� Breath of the Eternal, The New American Library, The Mentor Religious Classics, New York, 1960, pg. 40

[4].� Burtt, E. A., Editor, The Teachings of the Compassionate Buddha, The New American Library, Mentor Religious Classics, New York, 1958, pg. 106

[5].� Encyclopedia Britannica, "Tongues, Gift of," Vol. 22, William Benton Publisher, Chicago, pg. 288.

[6].� Cruse, Christian Frederick, The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1971, pg. 196-197

[7].� Ibid, pg. 199

[8]. Ironside, H. A., Holiness:� The False and the Truth, Loizeaux Brothers, Neptune, New Jersey, 1964

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws