Powered By Blogger

Saturday, October 31, 2015

The Emerging Church and Postmodernism


The Emerging Church and Postmodernism
by Matt Slick

Postmodernism is not that simple to define because it is a word used in different areas of study: art, film, architecture, literature, religion, truth, etc. The term "postmodernism" can best be understood by relating it to modernism. Modernism came out of the 1800's of Western Europe with the manifestation of mechanism, industrialism, progress, literature, art, and the ideas that sought to capitalize on what promoted a progressive and prosperous society. It elevated human reason, human progress, and human authority.

Postmodernism, then, is not necessarily a rebellion against modernism (though some postmodernists see it that way) but a movement "after" it, a movement that builds upon it but, more or less, rejects modernism's strict rationalism. In contrast to this, postmodernism upholds a subjectivity regarding morality, social constructions, political movements, art, religion, and truth statements. In other words, to oversimplify perhaps what postmodernism is, it is relativism, the belief that truth is relative--that objective truth may not be knowable.

"Modernism is often pictured as pursuing truth, absolutism, linear thinking, rationalism, certainty, the cerebral as opposed to the effective--which in turn breeds arrogance, and inflexibility, the lust to be right, the desire to control. Postmodernism, by contrast, recognizes how much of what we 'know' is shaped by the culture in which we live, is controlled by emotions and aesthetics and heritage, and in fact can only be intelligently held as part of a common tradition, without overbearing claims to be true or right."1

The danger of postmodernism is that it tends to deny the ability to know things for sure. It even undermines the construction of language by stating that words can be interpreted differently and that language is fluid and that the Bible, written in ancient languages, is open to various interpretations of equal validity. Given this underlying idea that nothing is truly knowable (a self-contradictory statement that is no problem for postmoderns), the very foundations of truth both moral and spiritual are suspect and open to re-evaluation--along with the Bible.

"Spencer Burke of the Ooze (Newport Beach, CA) agrees. 'A move away from intellectual Christianity is essential. We must move to the mystical.'"2
"This mystical/poetic approach takes special pains to remember that the Bible itself contains precious little expository prose."3
The postmodern mind
The majority of unbelievers today do not have even a basic understanding of Biblical principles. Their worldview is often naturalistic; that is, they perceive and interpret the world in light of natural principles (often evolutionary) combined with relativism in the areas of morals and truth. The postmodern person says that truth is understood in the context of one's culture and personal experience, and these observations in turn dominate how the world is to be interpreted. Instead of an objective absolute truth, i.e., God's revelation, the individual observes and accepts what he considers to be true and false based upon his experiences. This means that different cultures and different individuals will interpret reality differently. In other words, what is true for one person may not be true for another.

"Concluding from an earlier Barna study in May, David Kinnaman, president of The Barna Group, had noted that most Americans do not have strong and clear beliefs largely because they do not possess a coherent biblical worldview. The study found that fewer Americans were embracing a traditional view of God and the Bible."4

The postmodern person rejects the Biblical absolutes that there is an immutable God and that God is sovereign and that the only way to salvation is through the blood sacrifice of Jesus. Therefore, the Christian and the postmodern person often do not have sufficient common ground to allow proper dialogue on spiritual matters.

The postmodern person might ask if there is any such thing as truth and whether or not truth can be known either experientially or rationally. The modernist would say, "Of course there is absolute truth! Asking if truth can be known is an absolute question"!

Postmodernism and the Emergent Church
Generally speaking, those in the Emerging Church movement are aware of the postmodern mindset and admirably seek to adapt evangelistic efforts to accommodate postmodern thinking. This sometimes means that some Emerging Churches will feature church services and emphasize relationship, community, common traditional values while using visual methods, storytelling, and more expressive worship instead of absolute truth constructions derived from Scripture and delivered during preaching and teaching.

"Emerging Churches use paintings, slides, drawings, and candles as visual expressions. In addition, they might show videos or television clips. On occasion an art installation or exhibit functions as the entire 'service.'"5

We agree that we must reach the culture in a relevant way, a way with which they are familiar; but we must also make sure that we do not compromise the revealed Word of God, and we must not let the revealed truth of God's Word be subjugated to cultural or personal pressures.

Conclusion
To repeat my oversimplification, postmodernism is relativism. Postmodernism is a reaction against the logical truth structures of modern thought that gave us absolute propositions about nature, time, space, mathematics, knowability, repeatability of experimentation, predictability, etc. As modernism developed the sciences, technology, and medicine, it has helped to produce a comfortable and predictable society--wherein people tend to become complacent, comfortable, and predictable. But there are always people who ask questions rather than blindly follow the status quo. They look for different ways of expression, different interpretations of truth, teach the idea that truth is not necessarily absolute and that reality can be reinterpreted. It is within the postmodern context that the Emerging Churches are seeking to work.

It is a difficult venture to try to reach the hearts and minds of those who are less open to absolutes than previous generations. So, instead of absolute truth propositions, Emerging Churches tend to focus on relationships, expressiveness, and new ways of trying to reach God. Is it good? Yes and no. It is good only so far as it is consistent with Scripture. It is bad whenever it deviates from it.

Friday, October 30, 2015

The Power of Praying God’s Words


The Power of Praying God’s Words


I rolled over in bed, slightly disoriented. The glow behind the heavy curtains provided just enough light to help me figure out that I was in another hotel room at yet another conference. Squinting at the unfamiliar clock, I saw it was only 6:00 a.m. – I had an hour before my alarm would go off. I snuggled into my pillow, hoping sleep would find me, but as my mind began to clear, I knew that my time for sleep was finished. God had another plan for the next hour. I had fallen asleep the night before asking God to intercede in the life of one of my daughters, and the same petition was issuing from my heart as I rearranged the pillows, turned on the bedside table lamp, and reached for my Bible.

God’s word challenges me to avoid anxious thoughts. Instead, I am to develop a thankful heart while taking my concerns to him in prayer (Philippians 4:6). His word also urges me to continue to pray faithfully for things (Colossians 4:2; I Thessalonians 5:17). However, as I smoothed the striped, hotel bedspread then laid the Bible in my lap, I recognized that, once again, I had fallen into a rut of praying the same prayer with almost the same words. I knew I needed to pray more specifically with the Holy Spirit guiding my thoughts (Ephesians 6:18a). For the last few days my repetitive prayer had been, “God, please help her, guide her, direct her.” I would change the wording slightly, but the tone and plea remained the same. I knew I needed to be directed in how to pray more wisely for my daughter during this particular time in her life, so I opened my Bible and began flipping through the shorter letters in the New Testament.

A few years ago, I decided that if God’s word was a “lamp for my feet and a light on my path,” (Psalm 119:105), then the prayers of Paul, Peter and John should serve as an excellent guide for my own prayer life. When this realization really sunk in, I transitioned my devotional time to a delightful journey through the letters in the New Testament, looking for verses that revealed the writer’s prayer life. Every time I found a verse or a set of verses that I knew could guide my own prayer life, I would underline the verses and write the reference at the beginning of the letter. Each morning I would continue reading through the letters, and I discovered that there was such insight into how to pray as I used the writer’s inspired words (I Timothy 3:16) as a guide in my own prayer life.

My diligent work at identifying these prayer passages now came in handy this particular morning in the hotel room as I flipped open my Bible to the book of Ephesians. Beside the title Ephesians, I saw the chapter:verse notations that I had recorded years earlier. These prayer passages have become so dear to me, and I knew that the reference 1:17-19a was the passage that should guide my prayer time this morning, but I began by reading verses 15 and 16 of chapter one to prepare me for the prayer time that would follow.

For this reason, ever since I heard about your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, I have not stopped giving thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers (Ephesians 1:15-16).

I love Paul’s faithfulness in prayer. I love how he celebrates what God had been doing in the lives of the saints, as well as the responsiveness of the believers to Jesus. I was challenged by the fact that Paul does not stop giving thanks for the believers in Ephesus, and that he was continually remembering them in his prayers. This inspired me as I began my prayer time using these two verses to prompt how I needed to be praying. I thanked the Lord for my daughter’s faith and for the love she has and how she demonstrates that love. Then I took some time to just give thanks for the spiritual gifts she has, for the talents she has been given, and for the service she offers to God. I asked God to help me be more consistent in my prayer life for her. In other words, I used Paul’s words in these two verses to direct my own time of thanksgiving and confession. These words helped me to prepare my own heart as I moved into the next few verses that guided my prayer time for my daughter.

I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and his incomparably great power for us who believe (Ephesians 1: 17-19a).

What follows is a general outline of how I used the above verses as a self-guiding tool – one that would lead me to pray about things I had not yet thought of in relation to the situation my daughter was going through at the time.

“I keep asking” – Lord, help me to be consistently faithful in praying for these things.
“give you the Spirit of wisdom” – Lord, Proverbs makes it clear how wisdom is something we need to all pursue (Proverbs 4:7), and your Holy Spirit is that source of wisdom living inside my daughter. Please help her to seek out your wisdom and embrace wise choices today.
“and revelation” – Father, you have so much you want to reveal to her. Help her to carve out time today to “Be still” (Psalm 46:10). Give her discernment as she quietly listens to what you have to say.
“know him better” – God, I want her to know you better. During this growth opportunity that she is going through, help her to see more of who you are. Help her to see you as a loving Heavenly Father (I John 3:1), to see Jesus as her ongoing savior (Romans 8:34), and to understand that the Holy Spirit is her comforter, counselor, and guide (John 14:26).
“eyes of your heart may be enlightened” – Oh, Heavenly Father, we all need this. The eyes of our heart can roam, they can be deceived, and I don’t want that for my daughter. I want her to see all that is praiseworthy and good. Please, Lord, open the eyes of her heart to see what you want her to see.
“in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you” – God, that is what I want her to have – hope. I know that the more she sees what you want her to see, the more she will have hope. I love the fact that you have called us to claim this hope. The hope is ours to have, we just need to see it and accept it as a gift from you. Please help my daughter do that today.
“the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints” – God, thank you that my daughter has an inheritance waiting for her in heaven, but she also has hints or a foreshadowing of that inheritance available to her right now. She has Christians who have been put in her life to pray with her, who can advise her, and who can encourage her. You have designed us to need one another, so please teach her how to reach out and take advantage of the earthly inheritance that is hers as the daughter of the King (John 1:12).
“his incomparably great power for us who believe.” - Father, I am glad that the pronoun “us” is included in this because right now I need to know your power too. It is the power that raised Jesus from the dead (Ephesians 1: 19b-20). You have demonstrated over and over that you are able, so I ask that we, my daughter and I, will both learn how to better rely on that power. As we try to do things in our own power, we experience frustration and fear. I know that when I surrender to you, I watch you (in your time) take control and manage what I was unable to manage. Please help my daughter to rely on you this way. To daily fall into your arms, your strong arms that can be her refuge and strength (Deuteronomy 33:27a).
Once I finished praying through Ephesians 1: 17-19a, I found I had such a peace about the situation. God’s words ministered to me while guiding me in a new way to pray for my daughter and the situation she was facing. This, of course, was not the first time I had used God’s words to guide my prayers, but I was reminded again of the power in praying God’s words.

God’s word is to be “a lamp for our feet, a light on our path” (Psalm 119:105), so it certainly should be a source of guidance for our prayer lives. Consider a few of these passages. Underline them in your Bible so that you can easily find them when you are looking for a passage through which to pray.

Galatians 5: 16-21 (resisting evil) 22-26 (evidence of good).
Ephesians 3: 16-20 (be strengthened, established, confident in the love of Christ).
Philippians 1: 9-11 (knowledge, discernment, filled with the fruit of righteousness).
Colossians 1: 9-14 (wisdom, growth, joyfully giving thanks, redemption).
I Thessalonians 3:12-13 (love increase, heart strengthened, blameless).
II Thessalonians 1:11-12 (worthy of God’s calling, fulfill every good purpose).
I Timothy 1:12 (strength, faithful, service).
I Peter 5:6-11 (humility, anxiety, self-control, resist the devil, restore).
II Peter 1: 5-8 (list of things to add to our faith).
Jude 1:20-25 (pray, God’s love, mercy, faultless).
These are just some of the many wonderful passages that can be used to guide your prayer life. Record these verses, then begin the treasure hunt of your own. As you read through God’s word, be aware that God will lead you to many more wonderful passages that can inspire a deeper prayer life. If the principles in the verses you read apply to a situation in your life, then pray through those truths while applying them to you and your situation. God will richly bless you as you discover more of what his Word has to offer you!

Thursday, October 29, 2015


Twelve Points That Show Christianity Is True

I’ve had the privilege of taking a course on apologetics with Dr. Norman Geisler. He’s considered by many to be one of the foremost apologists alive today. I’ve certainly come to appreciate Dr. Geisler all the more since becoming one of his students.

In his lectures, he was adamant about driving home the twelve points that show Christianity is true. This is a logical case that starts by arguing for the existence of objective truth and concludes that the Bible is the Word of God. These twelve points have provided me with a strategy to keep in the back of my mind when asked about the veracity of the Christian faith. I hope this will be as helpful to you as it has been for me.

Truth about reality is knowable.
Opposites cannot both be true.
The theistic God exists.
If God exists, then miracles are possible.
Miracles can be used to confirm a message from God.
The New Testament is historically reliable.
The New Testament says that Jesus claimed to be God.
Jesus’ claim to be God is confirmed by miracles.
Therefore, Jesus is God.
Whatever Jesus (who is God) teaches is true.
Jesus taught that the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, it is true that the Bible is the Word of God (and anything opposed to it is false).
-

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

"What is a sin of omission?"


Question: "What is a sin of omission?"

Answer: James 4:17 declares, "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins." A sin of omission is a sin that is the result of not doing something God’s Word teaches that we should do. It is generally used in contrast with the corresponding phrase “the sin of commission,” or sins that a person actively commits. Paul juxtaposes the two concepts in Romans 7:14-20. He decries his tendency toward both types of sin. He does what he doesn’t want to do and knows is wrong—the sin of commission—and he doesn’t do what he knows he should do and really wants to do—the sin of omission. Here is a picture of the new nature in conflict with the flesh in which it dwells.

In the New Testament, the classic example given by Jesus is the account of the Good Samaritan. After a man had been beaten and left in need of help, the first two men to pass by—a priest and a Levite, both of whom knew better—failed to act. The third man, a Samaritan, stopped to show compassion to the man in need (Luke 10:30-37). Jesus used this example to teach that we are to likewise help those in need. By doing so, he clearly communicated that it is sinful to avoid doing good, just as it is sinful to pursue what is evil.

Jesus further describes the sins of omission in the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25:31-46. The goats, those who are sent away by Christ, are those who saw others hungry and thirsty, but did not provide food and water. They are those who saw others in need of clothing, who were sick or in jail but did nothing to clothe or comfort them. These are all examples of sins of omission. There was no sin committed against these needy people—they were not intentionally starved or deprived of their clothing. But the sin of omission was committed when those who could have provided for them chose not to.

Finally, the apostle Paul provides a summary statement that explains why we should do what is right and refrain from sins of omission: “Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up” (Galatians 6:9). When we do the will of our heavenly Father (Matthew 12:50), we avoid sins of omission and live productive, fruitful lives pleasing to God (Romans 12:1-2).

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

"What does it mean to be chastened? How does God chasten us?"


Question: "What does it mean to be chastened? How does God chasten us?"

Answer: Hebrews 12:6 says, “For whom the Lord loves he chastens, and scourges every son whom he receives” (KJV). Another word for “chasten” is “discipline.” The passage goes on to quote Proverbs 3:11-12, which says, “My son, do not despise the Lord’s discipline and do not resent his rebuke, because the Lord disciplines those he loves, as a father the son he delights in.” Proper discipline is a proof of love.

Throughout Scripture, God portrays Himself as a Father. Those who have received Jesus as Savior are His children (John 1:12; Galatians 3:26). He uses the analogy of father/son because we understand it. He compares Himself to a loving father who not only blesses but disciplines His beloved children for their own good. Hebrews 12 goes on to show that those who do not receive God’s discipline are not legitimate children (verse 8). A loving father carefully watches his son, and when that son defies his orders and heads for danger, the father disciplines him to keep him safe. God does that with us. When a born-again child of God heads for sin or refuses to resist temptation, our Heavenly Father brings chastening into his life to direct him back to holiness.

Chastening can come in the form of guilty feelings, unpleasant circumstances, loss of peace, relationship fractures, or any number of negative consequences for choosing sin. Sometimes, the chastening of the Lord can be physical illness or even death (1 Corinthians 11:30).

Often, people ask if God is “punishing” them for wrong choices in the past. All our punishment for sin was exhausted upon Jesus on the cross (Romans 5:9). The wrath of God was poured out on Him so that for those who are “in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1) no wrath remains. When we give our lives to Christ, our Substitute for sin, our sin is forgiven and God remembers it no more (Hebrews 8:12; 10:15-18). However, often, our wrong choices in the past have brought about unpleasant consequences now. God does not necessarily remove the natural consequences of sin when we repent. Those consequences are tools God can use to teach us, to prevent us from repeating the same mistakes, and to remind us of God’s grace.

Examples of chastening are found throughout the Bible. The Israelites were continually disobeying God's commands (Numbers 14:21-23; Judges 2:1-2; 2 Kings 18:12). He was patient with them, He sent prophets to plead with them, and He warned them many times. But when they dug in their heels and embraced idols or evil practices, God brought chastening upon them in the form of plagues or enemy attacks (Jeremiah 40:3). He still loved them, and in His love He could not allow them to continue in behavior that would destroy them.

There are many examples of personal chastening in the Bible, as well, even upon those in whom the Lord most delighted—Moses (Numbers 27:12), David (1 Chronicles 28:3), and Solomon (1 Kings 11:11), to name a few. Notice that, although these men made mistakes and were chastened for them, God did not stop loving or using them. He brought discipline appropriate to the crime, but always forgave the truly repentant heart. God always restored the relationship.

When we sin, we can expect that our loving Heavenly Father will not let us get away with it. Because He loves us, He desires us to live holy lives (1 Peter 1:15-16; Romans 8:29). If someone professes to know Christ but is living a lifestyle of unrepentant sin and claims to “feel fine about it,” with no qualms, then that person is not a legitimate child of God (Revelation 3:19; Hebrews 12:5-11; Job 5:17; Psalm 94:12; I John 3:4-12). God “punishes everyone he accepts as a son” (Hebrews 12:6).

Monday, October 26, 2015

What is the church?


What is the church?
by Matt Slick

The Christian church can be seen in two ways: the visible and the invisible. The visible church is comprised of all who claim the name of Christian and who gather together for worship and participation of the sacraments: the Lord's Supper and Baptism. The members of the visible church claim the name of Christian (excluding the cults like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.). The visible church contains both believers and non-believers, that is, there are people in the visible church who are not really saved.

The members of the invisible Church are the actual body of believers. They are the ones who are truly regenerate and have trusted by faith in the true Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The true Christian is indwelt by the Lord Jesus (John 14:23) through the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Christian church is figuratively said to be the body of Christ.

Rom. 12:5, "So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another."
Eph. 4:12, "For the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ."
The word, "church," comes from the Greek, "ekklesia," which means "gathering" or "assembly." Therefore, the church is the gathering of the believers who come together to participate in fellowship with one another as they worship God and hear from His Word, the Bible. The church as a whole has been equipped with people possessing different spiritual gifts (Rom. 12:5-8). The purpose of the gifts is "for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ," (Eph. 4:12-13).

The Christian church was founded by Jesus, and He is its Head and Savior (Col. 1:18, Eph. 5:23). Being in the church, the Christian is subject to the Lordship of Jesus (Eph. 5:24) through the administration of the Word of God.

The Bible does not provide a detailed method of Church government. But, it does state that there are to be elders who govern in the church. These elders are appointed by the laying on of hands (1 Tim. 4:14, 2 Tim. 1:6). They are to be able to teach sound doctrine and refute error (Titus 1:9, 1 Tim. 3:2).

The purpose of the church is to both glorify God and to inform the world about the work of Christ as Redeemer.

Saturday, October 24, 2015

"What is the day of the Lord?"


Question: "What is the day of the Lord?"

Answer: The phrase “day of the Lord” usually identifies events that take place at the end of history (Isaiah 7:18-25) and is often closely associated with the phrase “that day.” One key to understanding these phrases is to note that they always identify a span of time during which God personally intervenes in history, directly or indirectly, to accomplish some specific aspect of His plan.

Most people associate the day of the Lord with a period of time or a special day that will occur when God’s will and purpose for His world and for mankind will be fulfilled. Some scholars believe that the day of the Lord will be a longer period of time than a single day—a period of time when Christ will reign throughout the world before He cleanses heaven and earth in preparation for the eternal state of all mankind. Other scholars believe the day of the Lord will be an instantaneous event when Christ returns to earth to redeem His faithful believers and send unbelievers to eternal damnation.

The phrase “the day of the Lord” is used nineteen times in the Old Testament (Isaiah 2:12; 13:6, 9; Ezekiel 13:5, 30:3; Joel 1:15, 2:1,11,31; 3:14; Amos 5:18,20; Obadiah 15; Zephaniah 1:7,14; Zechariah 14:1; Malachi. 4:5) and five times in the New Testament (Acts 2:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:2; 2 Peter 3:10). It is also alluded to in other passages (Revelation 6:17; 16:14).

The Old Testament passages dealing with the day of the Lord often convey a sense of imminence, nearness, and expectation: “Wail, for the day of the Lord is near!” (Isaiah 13:6); “For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near” (Ezekiel 30:3); “Let all who live in the land tremble, for the day of the Lord is coming. It is close at hand” (Joel 2:1); “Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision! For the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision” (Joel 3:14); “Be silent before the Lord God! For the day of the Lord is near” (Zephaniah 1:7). This is because the Old Testament passages referring to the day of the Lord often speak of both a near and a far fulfillment, as does much of Old Testament prophecy. Some Old Testament passages that refer to the day of the Lord describe historical judgments that have already been fulfilled in some sense (Isaiah 13:6-22; Ezekiel 30:2-19; Joel 1:15, 3:14; Amos 5:18-20; Zephaniah 1:14-18), while others refers to divine judgments that will take place toward the end of the age (Joel 2:30-32; Zechariah 14:1; Malachi 4:1, 5).

The New Testament calls it a day of “wrath,” a day of “visitation,” and the “great day of God Almighty” (Revelation 16:14) and refers to a still future fulfillment when God’s wrath is poured out on unbelieving Israel (Isaiah 22; Jeremiah 30:1-17; Joel 1-2; Amos 5; Zephaniah 1) and on the unbelieving world (Ezekiel 38–39; Zechariah 14). The Scriptures indicate that “the day of the Lord” will come quickly, like a thief in the night (Zephaniah 1:14-15; 2 Thessalonians 2:2), and therefore Christians must be watchful and ready for the coming of Christ at any moment.

Besides being a time of judgment, it will also be a time of salvation as God will deliver the remnant of Israel, fulfilling His promise that “all of Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26), forgiving their sins and restoring His chosen people to the land He promised to Abraham (Isaiah 10:27; Jeremiah 30:19-31, 40; Micah 4; Zechariah 13). The final outcome of the day of the Lord will be that “the arrogance of man will be brought low and the pride of men humbled; the Lord alone will be exalted in that day” (Isaiah 2:17). The ultimate or final fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the day of the Lord will come at the end of history when God, with wondrous power, will punish evil and fulfill all His promises.

Friday, October 23, 2015

Hamartiology: The Doctrine of Sin


Hamartiology: The Doctrine of Sin

Purpose: It is the purpose of this study to acquaint the disciple with various aspects of sin that would help him with questions often posed by our society today.

Objectives

1. The disciple will understand truths about the origin of sin.

2. The disciple will see more clearly the fact of sin in the human race.

3. The consequences of sin will be clearly understood.

4. The disciple will understand that sin has permeated the entire human race.

Scripture Memory

For the one who obeys the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.

James 2:10
Agenda

1. Mutual accountability and prayer.

2. Sharing of memory work.

3. Discuss the study materials.

4. Discuss review questions.

5. Discuss any new terms.

Introduction

One of the chief questions posed by the human mind is, “where did sin come from?” That evil is in the world is not debatable. Every day there are threats and killings and sorrow that seem to fill our lives at every juncture.

This session is set apart for a discussion of sin and its impact upon the human race as we experience it.

We will discuss the beginnings of sin, its reality in the world, what happens because of sin, and its universality. We will also speak of its ultimate banishment from the earth and universe.

Worksheet

WHERE DID SIN ORIGINATE?

The origin of sin is not totally clear. There seems to have been a revolt against God before the world began. In Isaiah 14:12-17, there are words that are believed to relate to Satan sometime before the world was made. In reading this account, the statement _____ __________ occurs five times. That seems to be the essence of sin in its beginning. When we compare 2 Peter 2:4, we see that ___________ sinned having kept not their first estate. We don’t know for sure exactly what that was. There also seems to be a period of time between Genesis 1:1 and verse 2. Some have said that the translation should read, “the earth became void...” They suggest that the earth became void as a result of angelic rebellion, possibly because the angels aspired to a higher place than their creation allowed.

SIN’S ENTRANCE INTO THE HUMAN RACE

Having accepted the reality that sin is in the universe, how did the sinfulness of humanity come about? We find the account of this in Genesis 3. Read this account and see if you can answer the following questions.

1. Who was the primary person involved in the fall of Adam and Eve?

2. What was his appearance like?

3. Who did he approach?

Why do you think the approach to Eve was made rather than Adam?

4. What was the nature of the temptation?

5. How was Satan’s appeal to Eve similar to the account in Isaiah 14?

6. What was the result of the fall as indicated in Romans 5:12?

What was the result of the fall to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:14-24?

So what is in the human race today that speaks of sin? See Psalm 51:5; 58:3; Genesis 8:21
THE REALITY OF SIN

There are several ways we know that sin is in the universe We will consider nature, law, the human heart, and divine revelation.

I. Look at the contrasts that exist in nature, such as every rose having thorns. There is an awesome howl in every storm, the shriek of a captured animal, the minor key in all of nature and the shifting of the earth that shakes and causes the death of many of us who inhabit the earth.

We know that sin has affected creation because of Romans 8:19-22. How does this passage speak of the effect of sin in creation?

From this passage, is anything tied to our ultimate redemption that involves creation? Discuss this subject briefly.

II. How does the law give the knowledge of sin, Romans 3:20?

“Law” refers to the commandments given by the Father in the Old Testament.

A. James 2:10

B. Romans 7:10

C. Romans 7:7

III. Man confesses that he is a sinner. What do the following verses say about man’s own confession?

A. The prodigal son, Luke 15:21
B. King David, 2 Samuel 19:20
C. Achan, Joshua 7:20
These are but a few men who confessed their sin. Surely you and I would acknowledge the same.

IV. The very presence of Christ and the knowledge of the Father speak eloquently of the reality of sin. When an awareness of the Father and the presence of Christ are experienced, this brings a new awareness of the sinfulness of man. How was this described in the following verses?

A. Luke 5:8
B. Job 42:4-6

C. 1 Timothy 1:15

There is no goodness we can claim before a righteous God.

The Nature of Sin

Lest any misunderstand, it is important to state what sin truly is. There is no better Scriptural statement than that which we find in Romans 3:23. Most feel that sin is only capital crimes such as murder, adultery, kidnapping, etc. The above verse in Romans indicates that sin is to miss the mark. What does Scripture say in Galatians 3:10 about keeping the Law? “Cursed is__________________ who does not abide by _________ things written in the Book of the Law, to perform them.”

The Father requires absolute perfection. Who is able to meet that standard? “But,” one might say, “I have come fairly close.” Years ago I heard Donald Barnhouse give this illustration. In the state of California (before Alaska became a state) there is the lowest and highest elevations in the Untied States: Death Valley, and Mount Whitney. He compared lives of men to these. Some live lives of brokenness and debauchery which he compared to Death Valley. Most live in areas such as the San Joaquin Valley. They fudge on their income taxes, exceed the speed limit and occasionally shoplift. Yet they manage to stay out of jail. Then there are those with higher morals, who do their best to keep the law and have good family relationships. Perhaps they are even regular attendees at some church. Then there are those who are high moral people who become noticed by many: Billy Graham, Mother Teresa and a few others, who give their lives for the sake of mankind. These people seem apart from most and could be compared to Mount Whitney. But you could no more easily reach the moon from the top of Mount Whitney than you could from Death Valley.

In the same way, we have all fallen short of the glory of God — we have missed the mark of _______________. We miss it through negligence, unfaithfulness, crossing the boundaries set by God, and by ________________ _______________, James 4:17. Every thing we should do and don’t do is sin!

SIN, ADAM AND ME

It is impossible to escape sin and its effects. I become a sinner through whose sin? Romans 5:12 _________________________________________ Because I sinned when Adam sinned in the garden of Eden, I cannot be anything but a sinner. I sinned in Adam. What is the result of Adam’s sin in my life?______________ What does death mean in this instance? ___________________________ We might well say that because of the actions of Adam, we are all condemned to sin and death. What has our “last Adam” done that provides a refuge from this? I Corinthians 15:45.

Perhaps it would be good at this point to review the meanings and types of death spoken of in Scripture, and in Session 2. It would also be helpful for you to review the truths taught in Romans 3:10-23.

Questions for Review and Discussion

1. How is the sin of angels and humans different?

2. What are some of the effects of sin in nature as we see them today?

3. How much sin must a person commit to be condemned?

4. Describe sin from the standpoint of neglect as compared to disobedience.

5. Discuss some of the general ways we see the consequences of sin in the world today.

Thursday, October 22, 2015

The Imminent Coming of Christ



The Imminent Coming of Christ
Dr. Renald Showers

I. The Concept of Imminency
A. The Meaning Of Imminency
1."Hanging over one's head"[1]
2. "Ready to befall or overtake one ,[2]
3. "Close at hand in its incidence ,[3] In other words, close at hand in the sense that it could happen at any moment.
4. Other things may happen before the event, but nothing else must take place before it occurs. If something else must take place before an event can happen, then that event is not imminent. The necessity of something else occurring first destroys the concept of imminency.
5. When an event is truly imminent, a person never knows exactly when it will occur. A. T. Pierson stated, "Imminence is the combination of two conditions viz,: certainty and uncertainty. By an imminent event we mean one which is certain to occur at some time, uncertain at what time. ,[4]
B. Truths Associated With Imminency
Since a person never knows exactly when an imminent event will occur, three things are true.
1.A person cannot count on a certain amount of time transpiring before the imminent event occurs. Thus, he should always be prepared for it to occur at any moment.
2. A person cannot legitimately set a date for the occurrence of an imminent event. As soon as a person sets a date for an imminent event he destroys the concept of imminency. By setting a date he says that a certain amount of time must transpire before that event can occur. A set date is contrary to the concept that the event could occur at any moment.
3. A person cannot legitimately say that an imminent event is soon. The term "soon" implies that an event must occur "within a short time (after a particular point of time specified or implied)."[5] By contrast, an imminent event may occur within a short time, but it does not have to in order to be imminent. Thus, "imminent" is not equal to "soon." Evidence Christ's coming to rapture the Church was as imminent when the New Testament was written as it is today; however, today, over 1900 years later, it hasn't happened yet. Thus, from today's historical perspective it is obvious that, although Christ's coming to rapture the Church was imminent in New Testament times, it was not soon then.
II. The Concept Of The Imminent Coming Of Christ
A. The Meaning Of The Imminent Coming Of Christ
1. Christ's coming to rapture the Church is always hanging over the believer's head.
2. Christ's coming to rapture the Church is constantly ready to befall or overtake believers.
3. Christ's coming to rapture the Church is always close at hand in the sense that it could happen at any moment.
4. Other things may happen before Christ comes to rapture the Church, but nothing must take place before He comes. If something else must take place before Christ can come, then His coming is not imminent. The necessity of something else taking place first destroys the concept of the imminent coming of Christ.
5. Since Christ's coming to rapture the Church is truly imminent, a believer never knows exactly when He will come.
B. Truths Associated With The Imminent Coming Of Christ Since a believer never knows exactly when Christ will come, three things are true.
1. A believer cannot count on a certain amount of time transpiring before Christ comes to rapture the Church. Thus, believers should always be prepared for Christ to come at any moment.
2. A believer cannot legitimately set a date for Christ's coming. As soon as a believer sets a date for Christ's coming he destroys the concept of the imminency of that coming. By setting a date he says that a certain amount of time must transpire before Christ can come. A set date is contrary to the concept that Christ could come at any moment
3. A believer cannot legitimately say that Christ's coming to rapture the Church is soon just because it is imminent. The term "soon" implies that Christ's coming must occur within a short time. His coming may occur within a short time, but it does not have to in order to be imminent.
III. Selected New Testament Passages Related To The Imminent Coming Of Christ
Does the New Testament teach the imminent coming of Christ? J. G. Davies, the Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology at the University of Birmingham, stated that the expectation of Christ's "imminent coming" is "so vivid in the New Testament. ,[6] J. Barton Payne declared, "In fact, no natural reading of Scripture would produce any other conclusion. ,[7]
A. 1 Corinthians 16:22 - "Maranatha"
1. Its meaning. The term "Maranatha" consisted of three Aramaic words: "Mar" - Lord; "ana" - our; "tha" - come. Thus, the entire term meant "our Lord, come."[8]
2. Its form. The term "Maranatha" had the form of a petition.[9]
3. Its origin and significance. The term "Maranatha" was an Aramaic expression begun by Jewish Christians in the land of Israel. Why, then, did Paul use it in a letter to a Greek church? Barclay explained the significance of this as follows:
It is strange to meet with an Aramaic phrase in a Greek letter to a Greek Church. The explanation is that that phrase had become a watchword and a password. It summed up the vital hope of the early Church, and Christians whispered it to each other, identified each other by it, in a language which the heathen could not understand.[10]
Morris asserted that the term "Maranatha"
must have expressed a sentiment that the early Church regarded as supremely important, else it would never have been taken over in this way by the Greek-speaking Christians.[11]
Kuhn concluded, "Thus maranatha is an important and authentic witness to the faith of the primitive Palestinian community. ,,[12] Concerning the term "Maranatha' in 1 Corinthians 16:22, Robertson and Plummer stated, "It warns them that at any moment they may have to answer for their shortcomings. ,,[13]
It would appear, then, that the fixed usage of the term "Maranatha" by the early Christians was a witness to their strong belief in the imminent return of Christ. If they knew that He could not return at any moment because of other events or a time period which had to transpire first, then why did they petition Him in a way that implied that He could come at any moment?
B. 1 Thessalonians 1:10
1. The literal meaning of anamenein translated "to wait," is "to wait up for." It is used of persons who "wait for someone who is arriving. ,[14] Thus, the word refers literally to the activity of persons who "wait up for" someone who is arriving. Those persons do not go to bed at their normal time because they are expecting someone to arrive at any moment. Their understanding is that there is no time period which must elapse before that person can come; thus, they do not go to bed for a period of time.
2. anamenein carries "the suggestion of waiting with patience and confident expectancy. ,[15] Thus, it refers to the activity of persons who wait patiently for someone to arrive because they are confident that he could come at any moment.
3. Paul used the present tense form of the infinitive. A. T. Robertson indicated that the present tense of this specific infinitive gives it the sense of "to keep on waiting for."[16] In other words, it refers to the continuous action of waiting for someone. It can be concluded, then, that the Thessalonians were continuously and patiently expecting or waiting up for Christ to return from heaven because they were confident that He could come at any moment.
4. From whom or what did the Thessalonians derive this concept of the imminent return of Christ? Since Paul had been their teacher when he was with them prior to writing 1 Thessalonians (Acts 17; 1 Th. 1:6; 2:13; 2 Th. 2:5), it seems apparent that he was the one who taught them to expect the Lord to return at any moment.
5. It should be noted that Paul did not tell the Thessalonians that they were wrong to have this expectancy. Instead, he referred to their waiting up for the Lord in an approving manner (vv. 7-10).
C. James 5:7-9
1. The Greek verbs translated "draweth nigh" (v. 8) and "standeth" (v. 9) are in the perfect tense and indicative mood. Thus, each of these verbs refers to an action which was completed before James wrote his epistle and which continues on in that completed state.[17]
2. The implications of James' statements.
a. Christ's coming drew near before James wrote his epistle, and His coming continues to be near.
b. Christ as judge began to stand before the door of heaven before James wrote his epistle, and Christ as judge continues to stand before that door. James wanted to impress his readers with the fact that Christ could come through the door of heaven at any moment and cause them as Christians to stand before Him at the judgment seat of Christ. He could do so today.
In light of James' statements C. Leslie Mitton wrote, "James clearly believed, as others of his time did, that the coming of Christ was imminent. "[18]
On the basis of James' statements we can conclude that Christ's coming was imminent in New Testament times and continues to be so today, and that this fact should make a difference in the way Christians live.
IV. An Implication Of Imminency
The concept of the imminent coming of Christ has a strong implication relative to the time of the Rapture of the Church. Earlier it was demonstrated that, in light of the meaning of the term "imminent," the concept of the imminent coming of Christ involves several principles: Christ could come at any moment. Other things may happen before His coming, but nothing else must precede it. If something else must occur before Christ comes, then His coming is not imminent. The necessity of something else taking place first destroys the concept of the imminent coming of Christ. A person cannot count on a certain amount of time transpiring before the Lord's coming.
In light of the concept of the imminent coming of Christ and the fact that the New Testament teaches His imminent coming, it can be concluded that the pre-tribulation rapture view is the only view of the Rapture of the Church which comfortably fits this New Testament teaching. It is the only view that can honestly say that Christ could return at any moment, because it alone teaches that He will come to rapture the Church before the 70th week of Daniel 9 or Tribulation Period begins and that nothing else must happen before His return.
All other views teach that at least part of the 70th week must transpire before Christ can come to rapture the Church. The mid-tribulation view claims that one-half (the first three and one-half years) of the 70th week must elapse before He can return. The pre-wrath view asserts that approximately three-fourths of the 70th week must run its course before Christ can come. The post tribulation view declares that the entire 70th week (all seven years) must pass before the Lord can come. Thus, none of these views can honestly say that Christ could come at any moment. In reality, all three of these views are saying that a person can count on a certain amount of time transpiring before Christ's coming, and, therefore, are destructive of the New Testament teaching of the imminent coming of Christ.
It can be concluded, then, that the concept of the imminent coming of Christ strongly infers a pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church.

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Book Reiew

Book Reviews -by Dr. Gary Gilley
Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream by David Platt

Radical has been a New York Times bestseller and is reminiscent of Francis Chan’s Crazy Love in its call for radical lifestyle changes, especially in material ways, and in spreading a two-tiered gospel of reconciliation with God and caring for the poor. I appreciated Radical more because it is less condemnatory, legalistic and guilt-driven. In addition the true gospel is better explained and emphasized (pp. 30-36; 143-160). In fact Platt clearly remarks, “People’s greatest need in the world is Christ. To meet people’s temporary needs apart from serving their eternal spiritual need misses the point of holistic biblical giving” (p. 195).

I believe the author is on target to call God’s people to examine their materialism and take appropriate biblical steps to prioritize their finances to maximize the spreading of the gospel (pp. 127-128, 194-196). Platt is also correct that Jesus’ “megastrategy” was to make disciples (pp. 90-106); a fancy building, cool music and great entertainment cannot accomplish that task, only the Word can.

The reader also will respect Platt’s vulnerability as he readily admits that he has more questions than answers and is searching for balance. Nevertheless, he is a bundle of contradictions:

• He condemns the American dream throughout the book (pp. 2, 7, 26-26, 48-50, 115, 119) and then concludes with an admission that every facet of the American dream is not negative (p. 214).

• He elevates, and gives examples of, people giving away all their wealth to the poor (pp. 13-17), then calls for simply placing a cap on our lifestyle so we can give more (pp. 127-128, 194-196).

• He complains of rich American churches as he pastors one of the richest in the country (pp. 15-19).

• He touts the story of a couple randomly giving away their possessions (p. 131) and then calls for informed giving so that our efforts are not wasted by giving to those who will misuse it (pp. 195-196).

Of greater concern is Platt’s propagation of a two-tiered gospel composed of the true gospel of redemption and the social gospel. Actually the social gospel of feeding the hungry and giving to the poor is the primary focus of the book and accounts for its popularity (pp. 13-17, 19-21, 76-82, 108-140). He writes, “As we meet needs on earth, we are proclaiming a gospel that transforms lives for eternity” (p. 135). The author does not advocate the social agenda as opposed to true evangelism, as mentioned above, but he does say that caring for the poor is evidence of salvation (pp.110). As a matter of fact “rich people who neglect the poor are not the people of God” (p. 115).

However, when we turn to the New Testament, we find that, while Christians are to be loving and generous to all people, they are never told to attempt to remedy the consequences of the sin of unbelieving humanity through social action. Instead they are instructed to meet the needs of brothers and sisters in Christ, something Platt admits in a footnote (p. 225). In fact, the church is never commissioned to rectify injustices by dealing with the symptoms of sins but to “radically” uproot sin itself through the gospel. Conservative Christianity has always given careful attention to social needs. Wherever the gospel has gone hospitals have been built, orphanages established, the hungry fed, the uneducated taught, and the desperate helped. However, today evangelism is losing its way in the maze of the social agenda as more and more time and resources are being poured into alleviating physical suffering rather than uprooting the cause through the gospel.

How does Platt support his social agenda biblically? Largely through the misunderstanding of two passages in the Gospels. He contorts of the story of Lazarus and the rich man into a condemnation of the rich man because he lacks generosity (p. 114). Pushed to its logical conclusion this would mean he was judged and sent to hell because he was stingy, not because he was a sinner. Then of course there is Platt’s interpretation of the story of the Rich Young Ruler, a favorite of those who support his position (pp.13, 116-124). What Platt and others miss is that the Ruler was not a believer being challenged to radical discipleship. Jesus is speaking in the context of salvation and what the Ruler lacks for eternal life. The Ruler’s problem was not his wealth as such, but that he had chosen to worship his wealth rather than God. Neither passage of Scripture supports Platt’s point.

In balance, Radical offers a needed assessment concerning materialism and discipleship and that has value. However, as the title itself implies, this is not a book that handles balance well. As the author admits, it raises more questions than answers. And due to its over emphasis and confusion concerning the social gospel, I can recommend it only with caution.

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Tongues – To Speak or Not To Speak


Tongues – To Speak or Not To Speak
Speaking in Tongues
byLehman Strauss, Litt.D., F.R.G.S.
Introduction
This is not the final chapter to be written on the subject of speaking in tongues. Men (and women) will be having their say until our Lord returns to settle this matter once and for all time. It is difficult to say how, when and where the modern tongues movement began. In the many pamphlets and books I have examined opinions differ. We do know that the phenomenon of tongues‑speaking is widespread, and it is likely that no issue in Christendom has caused as wide a split in its ranks in modern times as has speaking in tongues.
All Bible‑believing Christians who study the Word of God are in agreement that the gift of tongues is present in the inspired Scriptures. In the New Testament two lists of gifts appear in which the gift of tongues is included. In I Corinthians 12:8‑11 “kinds of tongues” and “the interpretation of tongues” are said to be sovereignly bestowed gifts of the Holy Spirit. In I Corinth­ians 12:28‑30 “tongues” appears in the list of gifts. We call them “spiritual gifts” from the Greek word charisma, suggesting that the gift is a bestowment of God’s grace. It is not a natural ability that one might develop, but rather a special gift as those appear­ing in the above mentioned passages in First Corinthians.
The Holy Spirit is sovereign in the distribution of these gifts. Following the listing of the gifts, Paul adds, “But all these work­eth that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (I Corinthians 12:11). No one person has all the gifts, nor are we to seek the gifts. We must be careful that we do not confuse the Spirit as a gift to the believer with the gifts the Spirit gives to believers. Every believer has received the gift of the Spirit, but not every believer has received the gifts which the Spirit bestows.
The Meaning of Speaking in Tongues
In my travels many persons have approached me with ques­tions about tongues. Some of them ask about its meaning. The term that is used to identify the tongues movement is “glosso­lalia,” made up of two Greek words, glossa (language or tongue) and lalia (speech). It therefore means speaking in languages or tongues. Glossology is that department of anthropology which has to do with the study and classification of languages and dia­lects.
The word glossa appears in the Greek New Testament not less than fifty times. It is used to refer to the physical organ of the tongue as in James 3:5; once in reference to the flames of fire shaped like tongues (Acts 2:3); at least once in a metaphorical sense when referring to speech as in the statement, “my tongue (speech) was glad (joyous)” (Acts 2:26). As far as I understand the remaining usages of the word it always means a language.
When our Lord predicted the gift of tongues (the only mention of tongues in the four Gospel records) He said, “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues” (Mark 16:17). The adjective “new” (Gr. kainos) can only mean they were go­ing to speak in languages new to them, that is, languages they had not learned or used until that time. If I say the Russian language is “new” to me, I do not mean that I never knew there was such a language, but rather its use by me is new to me because I can neither speak it nor understand it when I hear others speak it. On the other hand the German language is not altogether “new” to me because I can both read and speak it with a small degree of understanding.
In Acts 2:4 Luke uses a different adjective when he says, “they began to speak with other tongues.” The word “other” (Gr. heteros) simply means that they spoke in languages different from the normal language they were used to. The context substantiates this. Notice the surprised reaction on the part of the hearers—“And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:7,8). Every man heard them speak in his own language (Acts 2:6). Here the word “language” is the translation of dialekto from which our word “dialect” comes. The two words glossa (tongue) and dialektos (language) are used synonymously, making it obvious that the disciples were speaking in known languages other than the language native to them. In verses 9‑11 the languages are then identified. It was a miraculous phenomenon which enabled the disciples to speak in languages which they had never learned. Here in this Acts passage we have tongues‑speaking in its pure and unperverted form as God gave it.
The following verses in the Book of the Revelation should be examined carefully (Revelation 5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15). In each passage where the word “tongue” is mentioned it means one of the languages associated with the various nation­alities and races. I see no reason why anyone should raise a ques­tion as to the tongues in those passages in Mark, Acts and Reve­lation meaning languages.
But the more serious problems arise in the interpretation of the twenty‑one references to tongues in First Corinthians chap­ters 12‑14. There are those who tell us that the tongues in First Corinthians are ecstatic utterances not known in any country on earth. They base their conclusion on the term “unknown” which appears in I Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, and 27. But the reader of this chapter in God’s Word must not fail to observe that the word “unknown” in every place where it appears is in italicized letters, which means that it does not occur in any Greek manuscript but was inserted by translators. The Holy Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown.
I find no warrant for changing the meaning of tongues in First Corinthians. In every other place where the word is used it means languages. Why then should the meaning be changed in First Cor­inthians? I know of no textual license that will warrant changing the meaning of the word. All the usages of tongues in Paul’s treatment of the subject refer to foreign languages. “So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into air” (I Corinthians 14:9).
There is no reason for anyone to speak except to converse in­telligibly. The Greek word laleo means “I speak.” The word is never used for mere sound or noise. Nor is it used for a mere mumbling or muttering of unintelligible gibberish. The tongues­-speaking in the New Testament was in the native languages of hearing people. The supernatural phenomenon which took place at Pentecost was the exercise of a gift whereby many people from many countries, gathered at Jerusalem, heard God’s mess­age in their own language. This was indeed a miracle of God.
It would be an arbitrary and strange interpretation of Scrip­ture that would make tongues‑speaking in the New Testament anything other than known languages. There is no trace of Scriptural evidence that tongues were ever heard by anyone as incoherent, incomprehensible babbling.
The Ministry of Spraking in Tongues
At this point in our study we shall pursue an examination of the reasons why God gave the gift of speaking in tongues.
First, to communicate the Gospel message. With unmistak­able clarity Paul says, “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not . . . ” (I Corinth­ians 14:22). The word “sign” (Gr. semeion) in the New Testa­ment is often associated with the conveying of a Divinely‑given message to unbelievers. This is the emphasis in John 20:30, 31 where we read, “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the pre­sence of His disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.” The signs (miracles) were never performed without purpose, but because of the message they communicated.
The true function of the gift of tongues is “for a sign . . . to them that believe not.” To exercise the gift when unbelievers were not present would be exercising the gift above the purpose for which it was given. The gifts were never given for the self-­satisfaction or self‑glory of the recipients. The one upon whom the gift was bestowed was merely an instrument through whom God wanted to communicate His message.
Because of the abuse and misuse of tongues in the Corinthian Assembly Paul states its purpose. The spiritual immaturity of the saints in Corinth called for instruction, so in the middle of his discourse on tongues he writes, “Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in under­standing be men” (I Corinthians 14:20). The Greek word for “men” (teleios) means mature. In their misuse of speaking in tongues they were showing their immaturity, a behaviour pattern which characterized the believers at Corinth. The Apostle re­minded them that they remained “babes in Christ” (3:1).
Their failure to grow up spiritually resulted from their neglected study of the Scriptures. The Epistle to the Hebrews stresses this point. “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” (Hebrews 5: 12‑14). Peter wrote, “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby” (I Peter 2:2). One will find confusion and license where the study of God’s Word is neglected.
Now let us return to I Corinthians 14:20. Immediately upon rebuking them with the words, “Brethren, be not children in understanding,” Paul adds, “In the law it is written . . . ” (Vs. 21), thereby pointing out their weakness, namely, their failure to ac­quaint themselves with that which was written in the Old Testa­ment Scriptures. They had failed to study God’s Word, therefore they had become victims of arrested development.
Speaking in tongues was a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit, but it, or any other gift, can be misused. Speaking in tongues was no mark of spirituality, because the Corinthian church was unspiritual, having manifested carnality (3:1‑3) and even gross sin (5:1). And so Paul points them to a Scripture they should have known, saying, “In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord” (12:21).
Paul is here referring to a prophecy God had given through Isaiah. The nation of Israel had failed to heed God’s message which He gave through their own prophets, so the Lord told them that at a future time they will hear His message through tongues (languages) other than their own. “For with stammering lips and another tongue will He speak to this people “ (Isaiah 28: 12). Thus Paul sees in this Isaiah prophecy the gift of tongues as a sign to Israel. The words “this people” in Isaiah 28: 11, in its context, can refer only to Israel. The abuse of tongues‑speaking in Corinth did not arise from the belief in speaking in tongues, but rather in the neglect of the Scriptures which teach its proper use.
This purpose of the gift of tongues, namely to communicate God’s message to Israel, is verified in the three passages in Acts where speaking in tongues is mentioned. In Acts 2 tongues‑speak­ing was used as a missionary or evangelistic tool in fulfillment of Isaiah 28:11. There was no need for the disciples to learn other languages before they could communicate the Gospel. God over­came the language barrier through the miracle‑gift of tongues. On the day of Pentecost there were “Jews out of every nation under heaven” (Acts 2: 5). And when the disciples “began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4), the hearers responded with the question, “And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:8). Observe that they were “Jews” from other countries who spoke many languages and dialects, and yet each heard the Gospel in his own tongue. Isaiah’s prophecy was being fulfilled.
In Acts 10:46 the second mention of speaking in tongues occurs. The occasion again was to communicate the Gospel, this time for the purpose of effecting the conversion of Cornelius and his house. This event cannot be totally disassociated from Pentecost because Peter, when relating this experience, said, “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning” (Acts 11: 15). At the house of Cornelius tongues‑speaking was a sign to Jews at a time when the Gospel was being communicated (Acts 10:44-46).
In Acts 19:6 there appears the third passage in Acts in which speaking in tongues is recorded. Again its purpose was missionary and evangelistic. When Paul came to Ephesus he encountered twelve disciples of John the Baptist. He asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Ghost when (not since) you believed?” (Acts 19:2, see the R.V.). These at Ephesus considered themselves to be Christians because they had heard through Apollos the message of John. You see, there is a belief unto salvation and a belief that does not result in salvation. The latter is a mere academic, intellectual belief that even Satan and the demons have (James 2:19. cf. Mark 5:7). Doubtless there are people today who have an historical faith in Jesus Christ as a man and even the Son of God, but who have not been saved. Paul suspected that such was the case with the disciples of John whom he met at Ephesus. When he learned they were not saved, he told them they must trust Christ for their salvation. We can understand the confusion they might have experienced, therefore some evidential sign was necessary. “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came upon them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied” (Acts 19:6). Again the purpose for speaking in tongues is obvious, namely, to communicate the Gospel message.
These are the only instances of tongues‑speaking recorded in the Bible, except the passage in First Corinthians. None of the later Epistles mention speaking in tongues. The gift was used only in the transitional period between Law and Grace. The sign gifts continued through the period of the Apostles while the New Testament was in the process of being written.
Second, to confirm the Gospel message. It was not merely a communicating sign but a confirmatory sign as well. When the Apostles used the gift of tongues it was because they did not have what you and I have today, the completed Word of God, God’s full and final revelation to man. When they went about preaching the Gospel, their message was confirmed by the exer­cise of the sign gifts. Tongues‑speaking vindicated both the message and the messenger. “Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds” (II Corinthians 12:12). If one could find an Apostle living today who saw the bodily‑resurrected Lord Jesus, he would not be exercising the sign gifts because he would have what you and I have, and what Peter, Paul and John did not have, the completed written Word of God. Now that we have the Scriptures we do not need miracles to confirm God’s message.
Signs were for the Jews rather than for Gentiles. “For the Jews require a sign . . . ” (I Corinthians 1:22). Repeatedly it was the Jews who asked for a sign. “Then certain of the Scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from Thee” (Matthew 12:38). Again, “The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired Him that He would shew them a sign from heaven” (Matthew 16 :1). “Then answered the Jews and said unto Him, What sign shewest Thou unto us, seeing that Thou doest these things?” (John 2: 18). “They said therefore unto Him, What sign shewest Thou then, that we may see and believe Thee? What dost Thou work?” (John 6:30). All these who asked for a sign were Jews, and their insistence upon signs will at last be their sad undoing.
During the Tribulation the Antichrist will appear, “whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders” (II Thessalonians 2:9), and at that time many Jews will be deceived into receiving the Antichrist as their Mes­siah.
Let us who are Christ’s not be seeking signs as did the un­believing Jews. We who are the Lord’s have the Holy Scriptures, so let us “walk by faith, not by sight” (II Corinthians 5:7). Whenever the gift of tongues was exercised Jews were present, tongues‑speaking being used either to communicate the Gospel or else to confirm to the Jews that the Gentiles were worthy of salvation and should therefore have the Gospel also. Such con­firmations are seen in Acts 10:45 and 19:6. “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen” (Mark 16:20).
If anyone denies the message of God’s written Word today, there is no other court of appeal. In the days of the Apostles, the New Testament being yet unwritten, the Holy Spirit sup­ported their message by accompanying it with signs. But after those holy and inspired men completed writing the New Testa­ment, such confirmations were no longer necessary. The rich man in Hell asked Abraham to send Lazarus from the dead that he might witness to his five unsaved brothers, hoping that such a sign (or miracle) would lead them to repent. But Abraham re­plied, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16: 27‑31). The Pentecostal sign ushered in a new age before the New Testament was written. But if men reject God’s inspired Word now, they need not look for any supernatural signs.
A significant New Testament passage which adds to the fact that the sign gifts were given to confirm the Gospel message is Hebrews 2:3,4: “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great sal­vation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to His own will?” If the Epistle to the Hebrews was written between 65 and 70 A.D. it would be obvious that the people to whom the message was “confirmed” with signs and gifts were that generation immediately following our Lord’s death.
The Mistakes About Speaking in Tongues
As an introduction to this part of our study, I want you to see Paul’s introduction to the subject of spiritual gifts. And incidentally, this is the only place in the entire Bible where spiritual gifts are discussed. The Apostle writes, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant” (I Cor­inthians 12: 1). In the Authorized Version the word “gifts” is in italicized letters, telling us that it did not appear in any of the Greek manuscripts but was inserted by translators. Paul actually said to the Corinthians, “I don’t want you to be ignorant about pneumatica” (the spirituals), meaning of course the spiritual gifts.
Now the Corinthians were not ignorant of the fact of the spiritual gifts, for the Apostle had already said to them, “Ye come behind in no gift” (l :7). When he said, “I would not have you ignorant”, he was not speaking about their ignorance of the existence of the gifts, but rather about their ignorance of the right exercise of the gifts. They were well informed as to what the spiritual gifts were, but they were ignorant about the proper use of the gifts, as is evidenced by the mistakes they made in their exercise of them.
Before Paul launches into a discussion of the spiritual gifts, he reminds them of how easily they were led astray. He says, “ye know that ye were gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led” (12:2). In substance he is saying, “Before you tell me about your experience let me remind you of your lack of spirituality (3:1), and therefore your inability to discern between the Holy Spirit and false spirits” (2:15). Because they were carnal, “babes in Christ” (3:1), their exercise of the gifts were self‑induced by fleshly energy, not by the Holy Spirit. All Christians do not use their gifts properly, so that a Christian’s use of a gift might not be in accord with the Word of God. Mistakes can be made by any of us in the exercise of a gift.
(1) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is synonymous with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is unscriptural teaching which says that all who are baptized by the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues. The Scriptures state emphatically that all saved persons have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body . . . ” (I Corinthians 12:13). All the believers at Corinth received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, however all did not speak in tongues. The ques­tion asked in verse 30, “Do all speak with tongues?” is so phrased so as to convey the expected answer, “No.”
The baptizing work of the Spirit is not an experience in the believer subsequent to salvation. Rather it is that act of the Holy Spirit which joins the believing sinner to the Body of Christ. More emphatically, there is no other means whereby one can be­come a member of the Church which is Christ’s Body. All saved persons have been baptized by the Holy Spirit, but not all saved persons speak in tongues. The baptizing work of the Spirit places the believer in the Body positionally.
Be careful that you do not confuse the baptism of the Spirit with the command to be “filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). All believers share equally in this position in Christ and thus share equally in union with Him. There is only one experience of baptism by the Holy Spirit but there can be many experiences of being filled with Spirit. Paul said that not all of the Corinthian Christians spoke in tongues (I Corinthians 14: 5), and yet he stated clearly that all had been baptized with the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 12:13).
(2) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of being filled with the Spirit. All believers are commanded to “be filled with (controlled by) the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18), but nowhere in Scripture are believers commanded to speak in tongues. A Christian can be under the influence and control of the Holy Spirit and not speak in tongues. There are numerous instances when the disciples were filled with the Spirit but did not speak in tongues. See Acts 4:31 and 13:9‑11. To be Spirit‑filled is to be Spirit‑controlled. Are we to believe that the thousands of mightily used men and women of God who were among the world’s best missionaries of Christ’s Gospel and Bible teachers were never filled with the Holy Spirit because they never spoke in tongues? Perish the thought!
Can one know if he is filled with the Spirit? Look at one verse in the Bible where the command to be filled with the Spirit is recorded. “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is ex­cess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God” (Ephesians 5:18‑21). Three things are mentioned as evidence of being Spirit‑filled; a joyful heart, a thankful heart and a submissive heart. Nothing is said about speaking in tongues. To sum it up in one word, Christlikeness is the manifestation of being filled with the Spirit, and the Scriptures do not tell us that our Lord ever spoke in tongues.
(3) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is the fruit of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit results from being filled with the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit is mentioned in Galatians 5:22, 23 and includes nine characteristics. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” None of the sign‑gifts are included in this nine‑fold cluster of fruit. The Christian who is filled with the Spirit will manifest the fruit of the Spirit apart from ever having spoken in tongues. As a matter of fact, in Ephesians and Galatians, where the fullness and fruit of the Spirit are discussed tongues‑speaking is not mentioned once. Moreover, in the list of gifts mentioned by Paul, gifts that the ascended Lord bestowed upon His Church, the sign gifts are omitted. “And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” (Ephesians 4:11).
All Christians should be filled with the Spirit and all are to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit, but not every Christian has all the gifts. Spirituality does not depend on speaking in tongues. God’s goal for every child of His is to be Spirit‑controlled, but that goal does not include speaking in tongues. No Christian need ever feel that he is lacking in spirituality because he has not spoken in tongues. Quality of life is the best evidence of the full­ness and fruit of the Holy Spirit. John the Baptizer was filled with the Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15), yet this Spirit‑filled man did no miracles and never spoke in tongues (John 10:41). But he was so Christ‑like that people who were looking for the Messiah were led to ask of him, “Art thou the Christ?”
(4) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of one’s faith. To the contrary, the persons who seek signs and sign‑gifts show their lack of faith. It is a sin for any Christian to seek for signs before he will believe God’s Word. As was pointed out earlier in this study, “tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not” (I Corinthians 14: 22). So you see, the Christians at Corinth were showing that they were weak in faith, and possibly some who identified themselves with the believer had never been saved. The person who seeks any sign, whether it be speaking in tongues or any other sign‑gift, is either a babe in Christ or an unbeliever.
Thomas is an illustration of a disciple weak in faith who would not believe without seeing. After our Lord arose from death, He appeared to the disciples. “But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe” (John 20:24, 25). Thomas was like the Corinthians, weak in faith, demanding to see the sign (miracle) before he would believe.
Eight days later the Lord appeared again. “Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless but believing.” (John 20:27). The doubting Thomas needed a sign, so the Lord appeared to him so that he would not continue without faith. And then He said to Thomas, “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20: 29). The Christian who will study the Bible and believe what it says will walk by faith, not by sight or sound.
(5) It is a mistake to seek the gift of speaking in tongues. It is clear that not all in the church at Corinth spoke in tongues. Why didn’t they? The Apostle says, “Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit . . . for to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (I Corinthians 12:4‑11). Please note that the gifts were given “as He (the Holy Spirit) will,” not as we will, “as it hath pleased Him” (vs. 18), not us. The reason why all the Christians did not have the gift of tongues is because all of the gifts are divinely bestowed. The Spirit divides and distributes to each believer his own gift. Not one of us is capable of choosing his own gift. The Spirit will not give a gift according to our desire and the way we pray. Don’t try to tell God which gift He should give to you. We are but mem­bers of the Body, and no one member has any right to tell the Head what to do.
It would have been a mistake for the Corinthians to seek the gift of tongues because it is the least of all the gifts. Where the gifts are listed twice in I Corinthians 12, in each instance tongues and their interpretation are placed last (verses 8‑11 and 28‑30). Note the careful wording in the latter passage: “First . . . secondarily . . . thirdly . . . after that . . . ” The least to be desired comes at the bottom of the list, the scale being according to importance and usefulness. The minor place of tongues is further stressed in I Corinthians 14:1, 5, 6, 19. The modern cult of tongues would have you believe that this gift is the only one that really counts and that every Christian ought to have it. The Corinthians erred in overemphasizing the gift of tongues as the most coveted gift of all. To them tongues was the prestige gift, hence its misuse and abuse at Corinth.
Paul charges them with such misuse of the gifts in 12:31. When he writes, “But covet earnestly the best gifts . . .” he is not exhorting or commanding them, as the imperative mood might indicate. Rather he is issuing a statement of fact, as is suggested in the indicative. In substance he is saying, “You are selfishly desiring the more spectacular or demonstrative gifts.” The word “covet” is not used in a good sense, but in a bad sense, that of self‑seeking. “You are not satisfied to be a foot, concealed in a stocking and shoe; you want to be an eye. You want to be seen and heard.” And then the Apostle adds, “Yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal “ (I Corinthians 12:31,13:1).
A young man who claimed to have the gift of speaking in tongues told me that the biblical basis for his doing so was I Corinthians 14:4, namely, self-edification. But this is both selfish and wrong. Paul did say, “He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself” (14:4), but then he added, “Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the Church” (14:12). The gifts were given for the edification and profit of the entire Body of Christ, not merely one member. “The members should have the same care one for another” (12:25). Self‑edification is contrary to the principle of love as taught in Chapter 13, for “love seeketh not her own” (13:5). The gifts were given for the common good of all (12:7).
(6) It is a mistake for a woman to speak in tongues. “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak . . .” (14:34). The prohibition here has a direct relation to the problem with which the Apostle is dealing, namely, speaking in tongues. Earlier in the same Epistle he told the women how to dress when they prayed or prophesied in the church (11 :3‑10), therefore he would not forbid them here in Chapter 14 that privilege which is countenanced in Chapter 11. The setting of I Corinthians 14:34 has reference primarily to women speaking in tongues. It is clear and unmistakable that speaking in tongues was a gift limited to men and is never to be exercised by women. Now he is not saying that women may not teach or testify or pray, but that they may not speak in tongues. Elsewhere Paul writes, “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Timothy 2: 12). The point of this passage is that a woman’s ministry must not usurp authority over the man. She may teach women or children, but not men.
If this admonition were heeded today much of the present tongues movement would be eliminated. Women are the worst offenders in the modern confusion of tongues. The word “speak” in 14:34 is the same word used in verse 28, therefore it cannot mean mere “chatter” that would disturb a service in the church. The purpose of this entire section on speaking in tongues is to curb the wrong use of the gift. Verses 27‑33 give instruction for men in the matter of speaking in tongues. “If any man speak in an unknown tongue . . .” (14:27); verses 34‑36 are directed to “women” exercising the gift of tongues. And if any women wanted to take issue with Paul, he would ask them one question, “Which book in all the inspired Scriptures was written as the result of the Holy Spirit revealing the woman?” (Verse 36). It is a mistake for a woman to speak in tongues.
(7) It is a mistake to assume that the sign‑gifts are given to believers today. Now I am not arbitrarily closing the door on miracles. God does intervene in supernatural ways performing miracles when and wherever He pleases to do so. The matter be­fore us now is whether or not the Bible teaches that certain gifts were temporarily given. The evidence of God’s Word must be the final source of authority. I am stressing this because there are many persons who are not students of the Bible, therefore their only source of knowledge and understanding is subjective, name­ly, reason or experience. Whatever appeals to their reason, or whatever experiences they have had, settle a matter for them once and for all time.
It is not uncommon to hear someone say something like this: “I cannot believe in Hell because I cannot conceive a loving God sending anyone to such a place of torment.” Such persons might listen to clear and sound expositions on the biblical doc­trine of Hell, and yet they will reject what the Bible teaches because of their inner feelings and rationale. And so their rationalization becomes their final authority.
Now I am not suggesting that there is no validity in experience or reason. I am quite sure that there are times when one’s reason and experience are correct and therefore reliable. But neither reason nor experience can be accepted as final authority. Someone will argue: “I have had the experience of speaking in tongues; I find this experience in the New Testament; therefore my experience is true.” Any trained Christian philosopher will tell you that such an argument is not valid because it makes experience the basis of truth, so if one does not experience all of the experiences he does not have all of the truth. True Christian philosophy moves from truth to experience, therefore any valid Christian experience must be determined by the right interpretation of Holy Scripture. Experience, which is related to our emotions, can be deceptive, but a correct interpretation of God’s Word can never deceive.
We come now to the question, Is the gift of tongues a part of God’s program for the Church today? If it is, then we would be wrong if we closed our minds to it. If it is not, then we are wrong if we insist upon the exercise of tongues-speaking.
Let us turn to I Corinthians 13. Now keep in mind the fact that the subject in Chapters 12-14 is spiritual gifts with the main emphasis on tongues, because tongues was the one gift that the Corinthians were abusing. Chapter 12 concludes with “tongues” (12:30) and Chapter 13 begins with “tongues” (13:1). Obviously from the behavior of the Corinthians they were lacking in the fruit of the Spirit, namely, love. And so in Chapter 13 the Apostle dwells upon the essential ingredient of love which supercedes the gifts, and without which the Christian is nothing at all.
Among the Corinthians there were quarreling and division, but the needed fruit of the Spirit, love, was missing, so Paul writes, “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (or love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal” (13 :1). In Corinth the tongues‑speaking amounted to so much noise because carnality had invaded their exercise of the gift. Even today there is a kind of spiritual prestige associated with tongues-speaking. For a Christian to show off any gift that God has given manifests pride that is lacking in love. Where love is lacking, the exercise of any gift is worthless.
If Christians would take seriously, within context, all of the teaching about tongues in I Corinthians, they could not fail to see that tongues‑speaking would cease. Paul writes, “Charity (love) never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away” (13:8). There will always be the need for love, therefore love will never drop off. But when the canon of Scripture is made “perfect” (or complete), there will be no further revelation from God, neither in predictive prophecy nor in divinely revealed knowledge other than prophecy. The gifts of “prophecy” and “knowledge” will be entirely unnecessary with the completion of the Scriptures. And “if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18).
Paul acknowledged the incomplete nature of the Scriptures in his day when he said, “For we know in part, and we prophecy in part” (13:9), or more literally from the Greek, “For in part we are knowing, and in part we are prophesying.” Then he adds, “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (13:10). The word perfect is in the neuter gender, and therefore refers to the perfect (finished or completed) Word of God. If the word perfect referred to Christ it would be in the masculine gender. The sign gifts were “done away” (rendered inoperative) with the completion of the New Testament.
Now what about tongues? “Whether there be tongues, they shall cease” (13:8). Tongues shall cease (Gr. patio), that is, they shall come to a complete halt. Who needs tongues? Only the untaught, carnal babes in Christ, for Paul added, “When I was a child, I spake as a child . . . but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (13:11). The word “spake” in context can only refer to speaking in tongues. So that Paul himself came to the place of Christian maturity, through God’s revelation to him, where tongues were no longer necessary. And so in the same tongues context he admonishes the Corinthians, “Brethren, be not children in understanding . . . but in understanding be men” (14:20). Experientially, tongues cease when the Christian matures on a diet of the meat of God’s Word. Actually tongues is baby talk.
For the past two years I have made it my practice to ask many of the leading Bible teachers and scholars, some of whom having a rich working knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, if they have ever spoken in tongues. Among them are college and seminary presidents and professors. To date I have not had one of about sixty men tell me that he ever spoke in tongues!
I have been asked if I ever spoke in tongues. No, I have not. God and I have gotten along nicely for the past forty-five years in English. I speak to Him in English and He hears and understands me. He speaks to me in English through His Word, and I understand Him.
How then can we account for the wide-spread practice of speaking in tongues? I do not have all of the answers to this question, but I will make three suggestions for your prayer consideration.
First, speaking in tongues can be self-induced. Second, speaking in tongues can be group-induced. Third, speaking in tongues can be satanically-induced.
Since the creation of man Satan’s insidious master-plan has been to put a veil between God’s children and God’s inerrant Word. It began in the Garden of Eden when the Devil asked Mother Eve, “Yea, hath God said . . . ?” (Genesis 3: 1), thereby raising doubt as to the authority and authenticity of what God has said. We know that this enemy has stepped up the pace of his strategy.
Our present generation is witnessing the growing menace of satanic activity in the realm of the miraculous. Where the Devil does not succeed in taking the Bible from us, he works hard at taking us from the Bible. And he succeeds in getting Christians to focus their attention on the claims of men and women to some supernatural experience, and in so doing those seekers after the experiences of others have neither time nor interest in searching the Scriptures for God’s truth.
God does have a plan in His dealings with the human race, and that plan does not necessarily include the continuing repetition of the same miracles in every succeeding century. The miracles of God are rare occurrences in history. Enoch’s bodily translation from earth to heaven was the only recorded miracle performed by God in over 1700 years between Adam and the flood.
The Church of Christ does not need a new Bible, nor new apostles, nor new faith‑healers, nor new charismatic movements, nor self-styled miracle workers. What the Church needs is to return to the Word of God and proclaim the whole counsel of God in the power and love of the Holy Spirit.
And if my reader has never had a personal experience of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, I urge you to receive Him at once, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:13).

Dr. Strauss taught Old Testament history for eight years at Philadelphia Bible Institute, and served as pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church, Bristol, Pennsylvania, from 1939 to 1957. He was pastor of Highland Park Baptist Church (Highland Park, Michigan) until the end of 1963 when he resigned to devote full time to an itinerant Bible conference and evangelistic ministry both in the States and abroad. Dr. Strauss was writing his 19th book at age 86 when he went home to be with the Lord in June 1997. His written materials are used by permission.