1
Corinthians 12:29 & 30
"Do all speak in tongues"
By Drew Dixon
General Introduction
THE SCRIPTURE
1
Corinthians 12:29-30
Are
all apostles? are all prophets? are
all teachers? are all workers of
miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all
interpret?
THE
RCI UNDERSTANDING
"The Holy Spirit is complete, and everyone who receives it comes behind in no gift while waiting for Jesus to return" 1
"Those who suggest that Spirit-filled people enjoy one or two gifts, but not all, are obviously in error......no! even one member needs all the manifestations of the Holy Spirit" 2
The
above statements are taken from various editions of the Voice of Revival
magazine (VOR).
It is a fairly well accepted doctrine that most in the RCI are familiar
with. The implication
is that if
you, as an individual, have the Holy Ghost,
then you are automatically endowed with all
the gifts/manifestations of the Spirit as
well. Not
only this, but all are encouraged to 'use' these gifts, particularly
when referring to tongues, interpretation and prophecy. It may sound odd to many non-RCI Christians, but the RCI has for many years
implied and preached that all in their assemblies are all and have all. All are
prophets, all are apostles etc. I have also heard the most senior of Pastors
preach along these lines.
Now some may dispute specific details, but I think the two linked articles further down (1997, 1992), spanning the better part of a decade, show clearly that most, including the senior oversight, did not have a problem in promoting these concepts. This is certainly the understanding the general assembly have.
THE
PROBLEM
The RCI's view does not line up with the general historic Christian position, which
is that
different individuals manifest different gifts as determined by the sovereign
will of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:11, this is also discussed in another
article). The RCI's understanding of
the gifts, is in part due to their insistence that you must speak in tongues irrespective
of the personal exercising of any other spiritual gift.
The problem then arises, that in 1 Corinthians 12, Paul makes no distinction
between the
gift of tongues
and the other gifts/manifestations that
he briefly lists and describes.
Therefore, if it is insisted that
all must speak in tongues, then it would logically follow
that all must manifest the
other gifts as
well.
This paradox
is also reflected in
the Revivalist understanding of Mark
16:14-20, which I will discuss in another article.
Within
the RCI, I have never seen anyone required to demonstrate any other
manifestations to show their state of "Spirit-filledness".
From the
RCI
perspective, if someone were
to pray
for another and
they were not healed, so be it,
the Bible demonstrates that Christians are not always healed.
If one's word
of wisdom or word
of
knowledge was
proved incorrect, that
person should
be more discerning next time (in this I refer to the RCI general understanding
of these things). If one lacked faith in a certain matter, he
or she ought to
pray about it -
perhaps next time. If one didn't
see certain miracles in their life, then
he or she ought not be overly self condemning as
God's will be done. If one
has never
interpreted someone's tongue (which some have not), then pray
for boldness to step out in
faith,
you can do it, you have the gift. If some have never prophesied (whatever one
sees this as), again, step out in faith, use the gifts. Philosophically,
it seems that the
gift of tongues has
been unnecessarily
elevated from a collective
treatment of spiritual gifts, and considered
somewhat differently. There
are to be no 'if's'
or 'but's' or 'maybes' regarding this
manifestation.
As has
already been stated,
1 Corinthians 12:29-30 can and does present difficulties for
the RCI position,
depending on how it is viewed. It appears to go against their perception that all have all gifts and in particular that all true Christians
speak in tongues. This is because it 'seems' that
Paul is requiring a negative answer, and that no, not all speak in tongues. The
RCI has developed two
understandings on how
this
scripture ought
to be interpreted in order
to avoid this natural
conclusion, both of which I shall look at. In the first view, they claim
the Greek text requires that a positive affirmation should be gleaned from these
verses and that and that Paul is really saying, "yes, all speak in
tongues". They maintain that the KJV translation is not really correct.
This view, or a similar form, has appeared more than once over the years in the
RCI VOR. I have provided for your perusal, two versions of
this first view, one from 1992 that infers this error, and one from 1997 that
expounds it.
1997
Voice of Revival article
1992
Voice of Revival article
The
second view, which is now appears to be the more popular
and
accepted one, is that in these verses, Paul is addressing a meeting situation, as
indeed
in a "meeting" Paul
commands that
not all should
speak in tongues and not all will interpret. This
article can be read at the following link:-
To
my own reading, both these understandings miss
the impact of the very point Paul sought to make and are fundamentally incorrect
on several fronts.
Also, the fact that both these views on this scripture openly ran side by side
within the RCI for the better part of a decade, highlights some very serious
problems regarding the RCI attention to method and detail in the
process of interpreting scripture. In this case it is seems they forced
scripture to say what they wanted it to.
NOTES
[1] 1997 April edition of the Voice of Revival, page 5.
[2] 1992 February edition of the Voice of Revival, page 14
[3] Pastor Lloyd Longfield, Brisbane Rally, City Hall, 199?
[<< Back] [Contents] [Next - The translators got it wrong >>]
[Main Menu] [Article List ] [Topic List] [British Israel] [Acts]
