Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
Now back to my previous post, about unanimity co-existing within multiplicity: if Jesus told them to wait in Jerusalem for the coming of the Holy Spirit, then why, ten days later, did tongues of flame sit on each one? Why did singularity get manifested as plurality? Was God divided in that upper room? Obviously not.
|
I cannot assert this with any force of superior knowledge, but this has been described by many with a more studied a view than mine (or Lee's for that matter) that consider the events of the visible tongues of fire, and the broad spread speaking in other languages as a sign. And that sign was more to the participants than to the onlookers, even though it was a significant thing for those onlookers. To the participants, they were suddenly filled with the realization that they really had not been abandoned. That the lack of the physical presence of Jesus actually left them no worse off than they were immediately before his departure, and quite arguably in a better position because they could all go in different directions and still have what they needed.
Having been raised initially in the Assemblies of God, one of the more tame of the Pentecostal groups dating back to the beginning of the movement, I have begun to consider some of the things I learned there — and since. It seems that the Pentecostal/charismatic groups so often speak of the "sign gifts," mostly considering tongues, healing, and prophecy (more in line with foretelling or revealing something hidden (about something other than scripture)). And then when they get to 1 Corinthians 12 and following, they look on their pet gifts in that list as "sign" gifts. But I wonder if there is a difference between the tongues as seen in Acts 2, then with the Samaritans, and then at the house of Cornelius, and the item listed as a gift in 1 Corinthians. In the three instances in Acts, the persons there (both the Christians and any others) all could understand each other, so language gifts were not necessary. They stood as a clear miracle to proclaim something about God. It put the light on Peter and company to speak the words of life. it turned the attention. And then with the Samaritans and at the house of Cornelius, it was a clear sign to the Jewish Christians that these non-Jews were also part of the Christian family.
Were the healings the Peter performed similar? Seems that he went along and healed someone who was not part of the church, yet not everyone in the church gets healed by some gift. Seems more of a sign than a gift to the church.
In 1 Corinthians 12, the items listed as gifts are necessities for the church. Some are in constant need. Some are needed on occasion. But they are given for use as needed. Not as desired. Not as something to drum up with a group of people standing around you with their hands on you urging you to begin to make sounds, "allowing the Spirit to begin to speak through you," or something like that. And the gift of prophesy is not something that suddenly falls on people to be exercised at the appointed time of the meeting so that they can jump up and declare "Jesus is Lord!!" and sit back down. Not saying that no one should do that. But I have serious doubts that the action/speaking and the gift of prophesy and/or the prophesying that Paul spoke of 2 chapters later are the same thing.
Lee was correct to state that "prophesy" means to speak for. And in some sense we all get to speak for God at times. Mostly with our actions and sometimes with our words. But I honestly believe that it is a point of equivocation to assert that this low level definition is what Pau is talking about in 1 Corinthians.
Not saying that testimony meetings are bad. They are good. The help encourage others that it is not just a bunch of good sermons to store away and check off on your "I'm more orthodox (or spiritual)" list. But the kind of attribution of that kind of speaking to the thing that Paul called prophecy is, I honestly think, an error. And it is not consistent with the whole of the words Paul used in 1 Corinthians 12-14. And the reading of "all can prophesy" as in invitation to open the mic for everyone is a "squirrel" moment.