SPIRITUAL GIFTS
956
SPIRITUALISM
speak at once? or tli.l they speak one after ilie other? ir the fiirnuT, woiiUI n<«t the eoiilusiim of soiiiuls be such as to reiuler their s|)eiikin{; a mere Habel? if the latter, woulil not a lonj;er time have been requisite for the whole to t^peak than tlie comlitions of the narra- tive allow us to sui)|X)se? (13.) In line, supposing tiie «tis<iples to have spoken intelligibly to these people in tlieir respective languages, why siiould they have ap- peared to auv of the bystanders as men tilled with new wine? Does not this imply an excitetl utterance and gesticulation altogether foreign to the case of men who liad simply to tell their fellow -men such truths as those which these disciples had to publish? These dilHculties have been so magnitied by some as to lead tliem to impugn the authenticity of tlie passage; while others have been induced by them to accept the hy- (Kithesis that the disciples spoke in (ireek or Aramaic, iiut were miraculously un<ierstood by the hearers each iu his own language. Hut they are mostly answered liv the facts in the case, which certainh- show that the ^l>eaking of foreign languages diil sometimes dl/end the gift <if tongues, if this was not its invariable and dis- tinctive peculiarity.
We now turn to the consideration of the opinion that the tongues were new languages in the sense of lieing ecstatic utterances, inspired and dictated by the Ilidv Spirit, and of a kind above what the ordinary' facidties of the individual could reach. We may pass by the o[)inion of Uosstcuscher and Thiersch that these tiiugues were angel-tongues, and that the gift consisted in the privilege of communing with (Jod as the angels do; fiir this is a mere conjecture without any founda- tiiin in the statements of the apostle, the allusion in 1 Tor. xiii, I to the "tongues of angels" being merely a rlietorical device to heighten the contrast the apostle is instituting. Schulz restricts the tongues to ecstatic utterances of praise to (iod ; but this is too narrow a view, as is evident from xiv, 13-17. Neander thus describes the state of the speaker with tongues: "The soul was immersed in devotion and adoration. Hence prayer, singing Ciod's praise, testifying of the great dciiugs of (Jod, were suited t(» this state. Such a one prayed in the Spirit; the higher spiritual and emotion- al life predominated in him, but a development of the nnderstaniling was wanting. The consequence was that since out of his peculiar feelings and views ho formed a ]iecHliar language for himself, he wanted the faculty of s<i expressing himself as to be understood by the mass" {Ap'i.iiol. /.cildlt. i, 179). Olshausen ailopts substan- tially the same view, but he differs from Neander in iiup|Mising that the speaking of foreign languages was iiir/ii'lti/ in the sfieaking wiih tongues. Meyer nnder- j'tamts by "the yXuxr'raic \n\Hi' such devotional utter- ances in petition, [>raise, and thanksgiving as were so ecstatic that the action of the person's own inulerstand- ing was Huspende<l, while the tongue, ceasing to be the organ of the individual retleciion, acted independently of this, as it was moved by the Holy (ihost." Hence he thinks the term ■yXaitrrrn came to Ixi applied to this gift, the tongue acting, as it were, independently of the nn- derstaudniit and for itself. Hence, also, he accoinits for the use of the plural y\i7)iT(j(iir XaXtlf and the yji/; yXionntui; as in such a ease there would doubtless be vnrietieH of utterances, arising from differences of de- gree, direction, and impulse in the ecstasy. The (ier- rnau iuterprei<TH in general regard it as being an ec- Hiatic |Miwer of speech, the residt of the man's being lifnd out of hiins<lf and made to give utterance in liMken. Iragmentary, exritecl oin bursts ..f thoughts and feelings, eH|M-cially of rriplnrous devotiun, beyond the onlinnry range of humanity. Some think tiiat there in an nlliisiiin to Hucdi ecstatic devotions iu the nrt- rayfiolr fiX,»\()ri)n,- of |{om. viii, 'Id. We cannot but think Huch a view abhorrent to the spirit of intelligent Chriminuily. See ToN(ifKs, (JtKT <>l-'.
(H. I hit'ipritiilinu iif T<iii;iiifK {ifmm'un yXioniriov). — .\« the y\Mana transcended the rovr, it could be
made to convey edification to the hearers only as it was explained (by translation or otherwise); and for this puri)ose the Holy Spirit gave some persons the faculty of comprehending it, and thereby of giv- ing its meaning to others. This gift sometimes was bestowed on the same person that had the gift of tongues.
8. Such were the gifts of the Spirit enjoyed by the primitive Church. They were ditt'erent aiul variou.-ly distributed according to the sovereign will of the giver. But amid all this diversity the Church remained one — the indivisible body of Christ pervaded and influenced by the one Spirit of all grace. Hence all these gifts were to be subordinated to the end of edifying the Church, and, more than all of them, charity was to be sought (1 Cor. xii, 11-31).
9. Li/e>atiire. — The commentaries on 1 Corinthians of Meyer, Olshausen, Hillroth, Osiander. and Kling; De Wette's Excursus on Acts ii; Neander, Apostol. Zntalt. vol. i ; Henderson, Lectures on Iiispiratiim ; Bleek, in the Sfudien u. Kritikeii fi>r 1829, 1«30; Wieseler, in the Studien u. Kriliken for 1838; Schulz, in the Studien u. Kritiken for 1839; Tliiersch. Kirclie im iipostol. Zeitttlt.; Rossteuscher, Gtibe d. Sprachen im apvstul. Zeitult. 1850. See Gifts, Si'ikitl;.\i..