Lesson 2: Comparing The Principle To The Experience – (Acts 2)
The Bible contains both historical and technical information. Some books are more history than others (Acts) and some include more technical information (Romans), but all the books of the Bible represent some history and some technical information.
In order to understand any particular teaching in the Bible you must understand both: history and technicalities.
The history includes culture, language, circumstance, etc. and, let’s face it, they did things in Jesus day we would never do in ours – such as knocking a hole in the roof of a friends house to gain access to Jesus. Without the technical data, we might conclude that the best way to approach Jesus is through a hole in the roof.
Historical events without explanations are open to any meaning a person would like to impose on them.
Can you imagine how Abraham-sacrificing-Isaac would be interpreted if we didn’t have technical data to explain it? Fortunately, we weren’t left in the dark. No space to discuss it here but for a full read on that event go to this post.
For now, suffice it to say that bare history is not enough. We can’t understand the history without the passages that explain the history.
Paul used this history-plus-technical-information approach to explain tongues and a lot of his information came from the Old Testament not the New.
That makes since. “Tongues” was a Old Testament mechanism (sign) used to rebuke Israel in both the Old and in the New Testaments. The circumstances were different but the principle was the same. “Tongues” (foreign languages) were used in both instances to convince obstinate, unbelieving Israel that they were working against rather than with God.
In the Old Testament the sign was manifested when Israel was taken captive by Assyria. In the New Testament the sign was manifested when the followers of Jesus, the Man they threatened and eventually killed, spoke in foreign languages on the Day of Pentecost. They were shocked on both occasions. In each case God had their full attention.
Hebrews understood the purpose of signs but Gentiles did not. They had no background or knowledge that could help them know how to respond to this type of phenomena.
It is, therefore, no surprise that Paul’s explanations were directed at Gentile not Jewish believers. He was speaking to people who had little, if any, knowledge of the Old Testament.
And to help bridge the knowledge gap and simplify the issue, Paul condensed his explanation to one short statement which we must use to interpret the “tongues” experience. That principle is found in I Cor. 14:22 and briefly stated is:
Tongues are a sign to unbelievers not to believers.
We discussed the principle thoroughly in part one. Now we must apply the principle to the first historical occasion when tongues were spoken in the New Testament, Acts 2:1-13. [Read more…] about “Tongues” Are A Sign, Part 2