Tongues, a SIGN to the UNBELIEVER

[Hidden In Him]

Correct. What I want you to 'see' is when you change your focus on the hearing in Acts 2, rather than the speaking. Then what do you 'see'?

Is this like the butterfly or the dragon inkblot test? : )

I see a bunch of people witnessing the power of God in action.
I'm guessing I'm still not seeing what I'm supposed to be, though. What are you telling me? (before I get more confused)

 

[CharismaticLady]

Is this like the butterfly or the dragon inkblot test? : )

I see a bunch of people witnessing the power of God in action.
I'm guessing I'm still not seeing what I'm supposed to be, though. What are you telling me? (before I get more confused)

8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.”

Think choir...

What do we know from 1 Corinthians 14:2? 2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

So if no one understands him, then what gift did God give to man to understand tongues?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Correct. What I want you to 'see' is when you change your focus on the hearing in Acts 2, rather than the speaking. Then what do you 'see'?

If the question is, did they react to it positively or negatively, I don't honestly see mention of any opposition to it in the text. I only see amazement and wonder at what God was doing (Acts 2:7).

 

[CharismaticLady]

If the question is, did they react to it positively or negatively, I don't honestly see mention of any opposition to it in the text. I only see amazement and wonder at what God was doing (Acts 2:7).

Not now I'm not. I want you to see what actually happened on the Day of Pentecost. As for the sign of tongues, the mockers fulfilled the sign when they thought derogatory thoughts. It is a negative sign to the unbeliever by itself, and they'll think you're crazy or drunk. The judgment confirms them in their unbelief. What is needed for them to understand?

 

[Hidden In Him]

8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.”

Think choir...

What do we know from 1 Corinthians 14:2? 2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

So if no one understands him, then what gift did God give to man to understand tongues?

I see what you're saying now. Well see, I take 1 Corinthians 14:2 in the context of the rest of the entire teaching, and in 1 Corinthians 13:1 he begins by prefacing that believers could potentially speak with the tongues of men or angels. So tongues of men is still in view when he gets to 14:2, only he is now focusing on the problem of tongues spoken without an interpreter, which is why he emphasizes providing one in 1 Corinthians 14:9-13.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I see what you're saying now. Well see, I take 1 Corinthians 14:2 in the context of the rest of the entire teaching, and in 1 Corinthians 13:1 he begins by prefacing that believers could potentially speak with the tongues of men or angels. So tongues of men is still in view when he gets to 14:2, only he is now focusing on the problem of tongues spoken without an interpreter, which is why he emphasizes providing one in 1 Corinthians 14:9-13.

Correct. Now apply that to the Day of Pentecost. What actually happened?

 

[Hidden In Him]

As for the sign of tongues, the mockers fulfilled the sign when they thought derogatory thoughts. It is a negative sign to the unbeliever by itself, and they'll think you're crazy or drunk. The judgment confirms them in their unbelief. What is needed for them to understand.

I think I see where you are getting this now. From the following:

20 Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature. 21 It is written in the Law: “By strange tongues and foreign lips I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to Me, says the Lord.” 22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers, but for unbelievers.

But to me this speaks more of all of Israel (Judah), meaning the nation as a whole would not listen. But this is in the context of discussing giving thanks unto God, and causing believers to confess that God is among them. This seems not to be a rebuke against those who come in, but rather an evangelistic tool, i.e. using both prophecy and tongues.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Correct. Now apply that to the Day of Pentecost. What actually happened?

Many were added to the church that day. One would assume they were from among those who both heard and saw the miracle taking place.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think I see where you are getting this now. From the following:

20 Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature. 21 It is written in the Law: “By strange tongues and foreign lips I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to Me, says the Lord.” 22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers, but for unbelievers.

But to me this speaks more of all of Israel (Judah), meaning the nation as a whole would not listen. But this is in the context of discussing of giving thanks unto God, and causing believers to confess that God is among them. This seems not to be a rebuke against those who come in, but rather an evangelistic tool, i.e. using both prophecy and tongues.

Now that I know what I'm trying to show you step by step, ask yourself, isn't it strange to put a judgment against Israel in a letter to Greek Corinthians who come short in no gift (1 Cor. 1)?

 

[CharismaticLady]

@Hidden In Him
Especially, when that verse has to do with Israel's disobedience against God, and the coming captivity by foreigners (Babylonians), and yet they still would not repent.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Now that I know what I'm trying to show you step by step, ask yourself, isn't it strange to put a judgment against Israel in a letter to Greek Corinthians who come short in no gift (1 Cor. 1)?

I think we have an intrinsic disagreement about the purpose of gifts. Certainly the Israelites did not listen, but it was not as if God didn't want them to. He spoke to them through the Gentiles in an attempt to try and reach them, and cause them to repent. Unfortunately they didn't.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think we have an intrinsic disagreement about the purpose of gifts. Certainly the Israelites did not listen, but it was not as if God didn't want them to. He spoke to them through the Gentiles in an attempt to try and reach them, and cause them to repent. Unfortunately they didn't.

But it is not a direction to Corinthians. So there is a hint of judgment and why tongues is a NEGATIVE sign to the unbeliever. Don't give up. You'll soon see "Jesus" in the illusion wood block, then you won't even be able to see anything else.

 

[Hidden In Him]

But it is not a direction to Corinthians.

What is not a direction to Corinthians? (specifically)

 

[CharismaticLady]

What is not a direction to Corinthians? (specifically)

The meaning of the verse in Isaiah about the Jews going into captivity and still not listening IS there for a purpose. But all it is pointing to is the TYPE of sign that tongues is to an unbeliever (without interpretation). When else in Jewish history did the Jews give their ultimate unbelief?

 

[Hidden In Him]

The meaning of the verse in Isaiah about the Jews going into captivity and still not listening IS there for a purpose. But all it is pointing to is the TYPE of sign that tongues is to an unbeliever (without interpretation). When else in Jewish history did the Jews give their ultimate unbelief?

Well, I'm trying, LoL, but I still think we have a conflict over the purpose of gifts. The LXX reads, "11 by reason of the contemptuous words of the lips, by means of another language: for they shall speak to this people, saying to them, 12 "This is the rest to him that is hungry, and this is the calamity," but they would not hear.

Applied to the Gentile Christians, this has them telling the Jews of rest for the hungry, which is to say the purpose of the utterances was to hold out life and hope to them, though they rejected it.

I can be kinda thick sometimes, so feel free to give up and just pray for me if I'm not getting it, LoL.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Well, I'm trying, LoL, but I still think we have a conflict over the purpose of gifts. The LXX reads, "11 by reason of the contemptuous words of the lips, by means of another language: for they shall speak to this people, saying to them, 12 "This is the rest to him that is hungry, and this is the calamity," but they would not hear.

Applied to the Gentile Christians, this has them telling the Jews of rest for the hungry, which is to say the purpose of the utterances was to hold out life and hope to them, though they rejected it.

I can be kinda thick sometimes, so feel free to give up and just pray for me if I'm not getting it, LoL.

LOL The other time that the Jew stayed in unbelief had to do with Jesus. They were shown the illusion and still didn't see Jesus, just lines. Both Jesus and tongues share the same TYPE of sign to the unbeliever.

Luke 2:34
34 Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against

It is a double edged sign that is positive to the believer, but negative and judgement to the unbeliever.

That was a rabbit trail, but the answer to this OP. Let's get back to Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14:2. If tongues could not be understood by man, how did the Jews on the Day of Pentecost understand them, but the mockers couldn't?

 

[Hidden In Him]

LOL The other time that the Jew stayed in unbelief had to do with Jesus. They were shown the illusion and still didn't see Jesus, just lines. Both Jesus and tongues share the same TYPE of sign to the unbeliever.

Understood.

Luke 2:34
34 Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against

Interesting application of the verse. It more likely points to the sign of Jonah, that He would be three days and nights in the belly of the earth. But interesting nonetheless.

It is a double edged sign that is positive to the believer, but negative and judgement to the unbeliever.

Judgment if they reject it, yes, as most of them did.

That was a rabbit trail, but the answer to this OP. Let's get back to Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14:2. If tongues could not be understood by man, how did the Jews on the Day of Pentecost understand them?

I was saying they can be understood by the one (or ones) in particular to whom the tongue is addressed, but that others present who do not speak in that tongue would not be able to understand it.

I gotta take a break for a bit, so I'm giving you a heads up not to wait for me. But hopefully I can get back to it later today.

Have a great New Years Eve, sister!
HiH

 

[CharismaticLady]

Interesting application of the verse. It more likely points to the sign of Jonah, that He would be three days and nights in the belly of the earth. But interesting nonetheless.

There is nothing in Luke 2 that points to the three days and three nights, just that Jesus was a "sign" and what type of sign. It applies directly to 1 Corinthians 14:21-25. (Remember that prophecy was not mentioned as a sign, only tongues) Compare Luke 2:35 to 1 Corinthians 14:25.

Luke 2:35b "that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”
1 Cor. 14:25a "And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed"

These are the only verses in Scripture that show both a "sign" and that particular purpose. A negative sign to the unbeliever.

I was saying they can be understood by the one (or ones) in particular to whom the tongue is addressed, but that others present who do not speak in that tongue would not be able to understand it.

That is your reason talking, but it is in direct contradiction to 1 Corinthians 14:2. I want to show you what isn't a contradiction.

There is more, so I'll see you later.

 

[Hidden In Him]

There is nothing in Luke 2 that points to the three days and three nights, just that Jesus was a "sign" and what type of sign. It applies directly to 1 Corinthians 14:21-25. (Remember that prophecy was not mentioned as a sign, only tongues) Compare Luke 2:35 to 1 Corinthians 14:25.

Luke 2:35b "that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”
1 Cor. 14:25a "And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed"

These are the only verses in Scripture that show both a "sign" and that particular purpose. A negative sign to the unbeliever.



That is your reason talking, but it is in direct contradiction to 1 Corinthians 14:2. I want to show you what isn't a contradiction.

There is more, so I'll see you later.

Hey, sister. Hope you had a good New Years. My apologies for not getting back. I have some house projects I've been working on and some other responsibilities, and decided to get neck deep in them to get some work done.

Anyway, I think we may be stuck disagreeing in this one. I do see it as fulfilling a negative prophecy, but the gift itself I still view as positive in nature. My reason is that outside of the Jews, the gift doesn't have a negative connotation at all. Today, if a Vietnamese unbeliever who spoke English came into an English-speaking congregation and heard someone speak in tongues in his native language fluently, declaring the wondrous works of God, he would be struck only with amazement. I don't think he would come away condemned by the experience as being a judgment against him, seeing as how there is no prophecy proclaiming that he would reject God even when God spoke to Him supernaturally.

But maybe you may still disagree in some way. Not a biggie one way or the other, just thought I'd give my reply. It's been interesting to think about, nonetheless : )

 

[CharismaticLady]

Anyway, I think we may be stuck disagreeing in this one. I do see it as fulfilling a negative prophecy, but the gift itself I still view as positive in nature. My reason is that outside of the Jews, the gift doesn't have a negative connotation at all.

The devout Jews were already devoted to God. They were not unbelievers. It was the MOCKERS that fulfilled the negative aspect of tongues as a sign to them.

It is a two-edged sign, just as the sign of Jesus is.