 |  |
sanctification" of the believer. This is dangerous, indeed and will be avoided by all who
seek to base their doctrine and practice on a rightly-divided Word alone. The gift of
tongues, by itself, would have been highly inadequate, for even the striking exhibition of
tongues on the day of Pentecost, was put down to drunkenness on the part of some
(Acts 2: 12, 13).
As a warning to the unbelieving Jew and a means of the rapid spread of the gospel and
the Kingdom message (Acts 3: 19-26), this gift had its place, but taken out of its Divine
context, it can be dangerous. When Satan, at the end time of this age, produces his
deceiving miracles and signs (II Thess. 2: 7-12) who can say that he will not use
tongue-speaking to seek to deceive the very elect? He has already used tongue speaking
in the past in the worship of the pagan temples of old. And if he does so in the future,
what can the Pentecostalists offer in the way of Scriptural refutation, and protection of
those who are exposed to such terrible deception?
To sum up--not all the miraculous evidential gifts of the Acts period were of equal
importance: Prophecy was greater than speaking in tongues (I Cor. 14: 5). Some of
them, like tongues, were to "cease" (13: 8); others were "to abide", the three principal
ones being "faith, hope and love", with love as the crown of them all (13: 13).
This gift of love, said the Apostle Paul must be sought after with the eagerness of
pursuit (14: 1). What a difference we might see today in the Christian world if this was
put into practice! It is surely a question of getting our priorities right.
No.22.
pp. 184 - 187
Having clearly taught that the gifts of prophecy and tongues were directed to the
unbelieving, specially among Israel during the Acts (I Cor. 14: 22), the Apostle Paul now
gives explicit directions to the Corinthian church as to how these gifts were to be used
when they assembled together.
They had to consider not only the effect on themselves, but also on any outsiders who
might come in.
"If therefore the whole church be assembled together, and all speak with tongues,
and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will they not say that ye are mad?"
(I Cor. 14: 23 R.V.).
Those who were "unlearned or unbelieving", probably refer to one group, namely
"unbelieving outsiders". That such found their way into the Christian assemblies, there
is no doubt. If more than one believer spoke at once, there could be nothing but
confusion, and such new fold would be disgusted and deem them to be insane. That this
happened is evident from the context. We must not suppose that the church's meetings
always took place indoors. Some Jewish communities had no building to meet in.