[vmatt]

You are mistaken. They heard the saints in their own language. The saints were prophesying in tongues and each one of a different language heard them in their own language. They would not have been suprised by someone knowing their language, what amazed them was that each one heard the same saint speaking in a their diverse languages at the same time.

Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

[the_doc]

"every man heard them speak in his own language."

I think you are being hyper-literal when you key on the fact that the word is "heard." (I understand the argument quite easily, of course. In fact, it seems rather banal to me, vmatt.)

The statement you quoted also fits the scenario OrthodoxPresbyterian presented--i.e., the participants at Pentecost spoke in tongues which were unknown to the speakers but known to the hearers.

Reinforcing this obvious sense is Acts 2:4. This verse is presented before the foreigners are mentioned, so when it says that the Lord's disciples spoke with other tongues, these tongues were manifestly foreign to these disciples. I would go on to argue that the very fact that these disciples were understood, in turn, by the foreigners gathered there means that the disciples were speaking in known languages which happened to be unknown to the disciples who were speaking.

Thus, Acts 2 as a whole doesn't clearly fit your scenario, but it certainly does seem to fit the one OrthodoxPresbyterian described. You are overlooking this because you are presupposing that the gibberish glossalalia is legitimate. I believe you need to re-think a lot of things.

Heck, vmatt, a lot of people who have glossalalia experiences are still lost as a goose. (Perhaps you have even notice this.)

Another reason why I believe that OrthodoxPresbyterian's overall explanation of tongues is correct has to do with the Biblical theology of the situation. Pentecost involved God building a spiritual edifice metaphorically reaching up to the heavens. In this respect, it is like the tower of Babel, but actually amounts to a reversal of Babel. God intended for this particular "global building project" to succeed!

That being the case, we can now understand the babble which the Corinthians practiced in their staggering spiritual declension. It was actually a carnal reversion (again!)to Babel's confusion. It was going in the wrong direction, It was not edifying to the Body of Christ.

(I have never seen this Biblical-theological argument from the story of Babel in the commentaries, but it seems obvious to me that this is what is going on in the story of Pentecost. Thus, Corinth was way out of line.)