Response to Dino246....
Acts 10 – This is what I was thinking your reference was to, but I didn’t know the chapter in Acts where it’s found – Peter and Cornelius.
Here’s my take on this narrative –
I’m going to paraphrase (and in a few places quote) here and there, from the book “Tongues Revisited – a Third Way” in which the author devotes a section which addresses just this subject.
We have to put this into a bit of quick historical perspective from what we know about Roman soldiers. Given that Cornelius commanded a unit known as the “Italian Regiment”, one may surmise that he was from Italy (Latin, “Italia”) and that his native language was likely Latin. He was in Caesarea with his “household”. A Roman soldier’s ‘household’ would have included not only relatives, but fellow soldiers and slaves as well.
Let’s examine this for a moment as it plays an important role with respect to ‘tongues’.
His relatives, like Cornelius, would have presumably spoken Latin. Fellow soldiers also spoke Latin, but as Roman soldiers it’s important to note that they could have come from just about anywhere in the Empire. Likewise, and especially, his slaves.
In short, though his fellow soldiers spoke Latin, it may not at all have been their native language(s). His slaves, almost certainly not – though they spoke and understood some Latin, it’s very unlikely that they would have been native Latin speakers. Like the soldiers, their native language(s) could have come from anywhere in the Roman Empire.
So, in Cornelius’ household, we essentially have several people who comprised a multi-lingual group. We must also surmise that most of this company also spoke Greek in varying degrees. The passage is silent as to what language Peter and his group, and Cornelius and his group, conversed in; but, as was the practice in the day when speakers of two different languages tried to communicate with each other, the common language of choice was Greek (just as it would be English in today’s world).
Since the narrative reported no communication difficulty, I think it safe to assume that the common language in this scenario would have been Greek. Peter may have known a few words and phrases in Latin (from the Roman occupation of his homeland), but it’s very unlikely he spoke it. Also unlikely is that Cornelius spoke Aramaic with any degree of fluency.
From the narrative, we know that the incident is reported from the perspective of Peter and his group. “They (Peter and his company) heard them speaking in languages (“tongues”) and praising God”.
From this, we can deduce two types of speech here: (1) speech that Peter and his group understood, and (2) speech they did not understand.
Considering Peter and his company report in the narrative that they knew that some of what was said were praises to God, it must have been said in a language they knew (likely Greek, but possibly some recognized Latin). Some of what was said however, they did not understand because it was foreign to them. Peter and his company did not speak, nor apparently recognize, those languages.
To quote from the aforementioned book – “Is praise of God, that is, saying in some way how marvelous God is, evidence for the presence of the Holy Spirit? If backed up by a true understanding of and commitment to God and his work, then I would say it is indeed an indication of the residence in that person of the Holy Spirit. It is to be expected that a new believer will praise the Lord in some way, and these people had just minutes previously become believers in Christ! Cornelius and his family were devout and God-fearing (Acts 10:2, 22). They had accepted the revelation of God that they knew of up to that point, but they were not saved (Acts 11:14). They had become Jewish proselytes, Gentiles who had adopted the faith of the Jews. This was in spite of the disdain in which they were held by ethnic Jews (Acts 10:28) even while they were respected by them (Acts 10:22).”
The likely scenario was that Peter and his company entered Cornelius’s house and Peter addressed the gathered group, telling them about Jesus, his life, resurrection, etc. Cornelius and his company responded to what they heard as a reaffirmation of what they already believed. Reacting joyously, some of them addressed the Lord directly in their mother-tongue; languages Peter and his company did not know or speak or turned to their companions and discussed these tremendous things with them (again in languages unknown to Peter and his companions). Considering the soldiers, and especially the slaves, could have come from anywhere in the Empire – any number of languages are possible here.
To quote directly again - “Some of them, perhaps for the benefit of Peter and his friends, addressed the Lord, or talked among themselves in their shared language (likely, Greek). They were filled with the wonder and joy of having received 'life through repentance' (Acts 11:18). It was very evident to Peter and the others that here were truly converted people. It is so reminiscent of Acts 2; the multilingual situation and the praise of the wonders of God, though in this case it was from newly converted people. Another difference also was that here there were no cultural 'high language/low language' conventions to break. These people were simply thrilled that they were saved and told the Lord so. This is quite sufficient to have prompted Peter's comment, "The Holy Spirit came on them as he came on us at the beginning." “
When a bi-lingual or multi-lingual speaker utters something suddenly/spur of the moment in an emotional outburst (not to be taken with any negative connotations), the speaker will always revert to their native language. That’s just a known fact. These people here were in the same situation and reverted to languages Peter and his company did not speak. Hence, as far as Peter and his company were concerned, they began “speaking in tongues”.
So, no modern tongues-speech here, just plain old real languages. Languages Peter and his friends apparently did not know or recognize. Cornelius and his company were among the non-Jews; thus, any native language(s) they spoke, including Latin itself, would have been considered a “tongue” (read “language”).
With respect to “tongues”, I don’t see this narrative as being anything but a real rational language situation.
Acts 2 - The list of areas, commonly referred to as the “List of Nations” in the Pentecost narrative was not at all irrelevant; it was actually included for political reasons – The blog I referenced addresses your questions, so I won’t go into detail here.
I get what you’re saying about manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and I wish I could explain it better than this, but I think it’s a manifestation of the H/S if that ‘gift/knack/ability’ is used for the glory of God and to further the message of Christianity, i.e. used in a spiritual context. In other words, it’s not so much the ability itself, but rather how it’s used that defines it as being a “manifestation of the H/S”.
Anyone can be granted the ‘gift/ability/knack’ for great wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing abilities, etc., just as anyone can be granted the ability to easily learn languages and/or translate those languages. But it’s how that gift/ability/talent is used that determines/defines it as a ‘manifestation of the H/S”.
Take a totally different ‘gift’ – music. A person may be a ‘gifted’ musician, have the ability/knack/talent, etc. to easily learn to play all sorts of instruments, or to excel at singing, or composing, etc.
For such a person, I would say that they have a God-given ‘gift’ for music. Sure, just about anyone can learn to play an instrument, or to sing, or even compose, but there are those who we say are truly ‘gifted’ at it. Their ability/talent far exceeds the ‘norm’.
Can we say that this is a God-given gift? Yes, I think so. Can it be considered a gift/manifestation of the H/S? I would say if that ability is somehow used in the service of God in whatever way, such that through this ability one could sort of ‘see the power of God’ or the H/S working though this person (that’s probably not the best way to put it, but the only way I can think of to try and explain what I mean by it), then, yes, I would say that it is a manifestation of the H/S. I think that what’s being ‘manifested’ is not so much the particular ability, but rather for an ‘onlooker’ to see the power of God working through this person to further the glory of God (if that makes any sense).
So does that mean that if one has such an ability/gift and doesn’t use it ‘in the service of God‘, that it’s not a ‘gift’? No, I don’t think so. It is a God-given gift; but, it’s not really a manifestation of the H/S either.
In a sense, I think, one could almost argue that that there are two separate concepts here – the gift itself, and one could certainly argue that it’s a gift given by the H/S, and the ‘manifestation of the H/S’ through that gift. That seems to require that the gift be somehow used to further the glory of God.
So, yes, none of the gifts described in Corinthians can be accomplished by just human effort. Sure, people may be able to do these things to some degree by their own efforts, but to truly excel at them to a point where one can say to have been ‘gifted’ the ability, requires divine intervention.
Anyone, Christian or not, can learn a language, but the ability to truly excel at them is a ‘gift’. I don’t hold that one needs to be a Christian to be gifted such abilities – regardless of a person’s spiritual path, they all may be said to be God-given gifts. For that gift to be a manifestation of the H/S however, I think would require one to be Christian (in the broad sense of the term).
That probably doesn’t really answer the question very well, but it’s the best way I can explain how I view it.
