Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The first variety seemed to be without need for interpretation because all those who heard it heard their own language being spoken.

Acts 2:8 (NKJV):

And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?

The second one the church is warned not to utter without interpretation. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:28 (NKJV):

But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God.

And in 14:23:

Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or un-believers, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

What makes the initial event different from the subsequent?

share|improve this question
1  
I would say there are in fact three different variations of tongues in the New Testament. Romans 8:26, "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words." has been taken by some Christians to refer to a special prayer language; this is sometimes known as "praying in tongues". –  Bruce Alderman Oct 12 '11 at 16:50
    
Thank you. I'm still curious about the first event being one that everyone who heard it understood it as their own language...not the as the "language of angels" as I have heard it sometimes referred to as today. Why did it change into something that needed interpretation? Is there any clue for this in scripture? Or, even a personal opinion would be welcome. –  new wings Oct 12 '11 at 18:16
    
My guess is that what happened in Acts 2 was fundamentally different from what is commonly called "tongues" in the New Testament. –  Bruce Alderman Oct 12 '11 at 21:52
    
I was thinking that because it was the first time that sort of thing happened that it was done in a way that everyone understood each other so there wasn't complete confusion. It may have freaked everyone out a lot more if no one could understand what was being said...or what they themselves were saying. So, maybe God was sort of easing them into that form of prayer? –  new wings Oct 13 '11 at 5:47
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote accepted

In reference to the Acts passage:

The believers speaking in native tongues is a throwback to a Midrash on the Sinai event when the Law was received. The rabbinic retelling has Israel speaking in all the tongues of the world, meaning that this is a monumental act of GOD happening. The gospel is here, guided by the spirit and is intended for all peoples of the world, thereby undoing the judgement of the tower of babel.

The midrash is from Midrash Tanhuma 26c, as referenced in the book Speaking in tongues: the New Testament evidence in context.

And in respect to the Corinthians passages:

They are In respect to the spirit of GOD speaking through someone for the building up and edification of the local church and therefore not necessarily with the intention of evangelism. The Corinthians used to fake speaking in tounges because they wanted to be seen as spiritual but here Paul is putting an end to that by saying don't speak in tongues in church unless there is an interpreter.

Craig keener, a Pentecostal evangelical conservative scholar has a great commentary on this called 1 + 2 Corinthians, it's totally worth the money.

share|improve this answer
1  
Where did you get the information in your first paragraph? I appreciate the historic reference. –  new wings Oct 13 '11 at 14:56
    
just put in the reference! –  jchaffee Oct 13 '11 at 18:32
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.