My general position is not to argue with Phillip Jensen. Actually, there are many men and women who have thought much more about the Bible than myself, whom I trust, that I just don't open my mouth if I disagree with them. Experience has taught me they have thought more about the issue than I, and so always hold trumps. However, far above this I will always appeal to a plain reading of Scripture. If the Bible says what it appears to say, and this is in contradiction to that taught by those I trust, I will not hesitate to speak.Good friend Dave has been chatting with me about what exactly is speaking in tongues. I agree completely with Dave when he says:
Paul doesn't seem to be as hung up on the question of what language he is talking about as we do - our question is it another language, angelic language, spirit language - Paul avoids the question and his refrain throughout is crystal clear, at least it is to me - do what builds up the church. This leads him to say that prophecy builds up more than tongue speaking. Therefore pursue prophecy more than tongues (eagerly desire the greater spiritual gifts) but all this has to be done in love (14:1 Pursue love and all of ch 13 for that matter!)
A heartfelt 'Amen' from me. Yet at the same time i think it is important to challenge what is by far the most prominent evangelical view of what speaking in tongues entails. I have heard it taught over and over again, that speaking in tongues is simply knowing a foreign language. If you studied French in high school (which is perhaps more than just knowing 'creme brulee' and 'deja vu') then you are well on the way to having the gift of tongues.
We often use the word 'tongue' as a way of speaking of languages, for example we speak of 'your mother tongue' being your original language. It seems highly likely from the Biblical examples of speaking in tongues that this is well within the definition - that it is human languages, which probably include those learnt at school.
Yet to me, a plain reading of the Bible suggests that we can't limit this phenomenon to languages studied. I think this because:
1. There is such a thing as the gift of interpretation. (1 Cor 12:10, 12:30, 14:13). Why would one pray for the gift of interpretation if they already had the capacity to speak in the mother tongue of the congregation? I've never met someone who knew two languages that had no capacity to translate what they were saying between the two.
2. People can speak in tongues without any prior knowledge of the language. This phenomenon is seen as a miraculous sign that the gospel is for all nations in Acts 10:44-48. Were this just the culmination of years of language learning it would be tremendously unspectacular. There is nothing really that amazing about foreigners knowing other languages.
Speaking in tongues is in my mind more than learning French. It most certainly must include this, but must also include a sudden ability to speak a foreign language without prior knowledge of it. Dare I say it; a view which limits tongue-speaking to no more than language learning is a convenient way of discounting the miraculous.
Now as Dave will rightfully remind me this should not be where our discussion is focused. So for a summary, please read Dave's quote above.
0 comments:
Post a Comment