Original post by NJAGod's covenants began with a sign, the sign remains... the rainbow, circumcision etc.
In the Old Testament God's presenced himself in fire, Acts 2:3 shows the transferrence from Old to New Covenants. God's temple, his dwelling place is now in people who have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire.
The wind and fire happened just before the receiving of the Spirit and was a one-off event... receiving the Spirit, speaking in tongues remained.
Years later in Acts 19 Paul knew the believeers who he had re-baptised still hadn't received the Spirit, that's why he laid hands on them and that's how he knew precisely when they received the Spirit.
The New Covenant is described by the prophets aas a new heart, the sign of receiving that was, and is speaking in new tongue(s).
There is and cannot be any change:
"Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." (Gal.3:15)
If anyone breaks this covenant, they are the "malicious" one!
"The gifts" are the meetings-use, *giving* to the church of what all Christians have for private use.
Ther gifts list (1 Corinthians 12:8 onwards) is not saying that different people get different attributes when they become Christians... read it again, it says "to one" is given the word of wisdom, "to another" the word of knowledge, to another faith etc.
You wouldn't say that only some Christians have each of these, would you?
How can you even become a Christian without them?
1 Corinthians begins by affirming that they all have all these attributes (1:4-7) - that's why there needs to be limitation & order when all meet, which is why it specifically says "to one", "to another"- in meetings only one person should speak at a time.
If it was true that only some of them could speak in tongues Paul wouldn't have to reason with them not to all do it in meetings - the problem could never arise!
Also his encouragement to pray in tongues would only be applicable to a certain clique in the church.
No, Corinthians agrees with Acts and other passages that show all all speaking in tongues
Acts also shows that it was known precisely when people received God's (invisible) Spirit, by his sign of tongues.
So, if it were possible to receive the Spirit (become a Christian in the true sense) without tongues they could not have made this judgement.
Like all my brothers & sisters, I pray in tongues & use the other attributes of God daily, but, in a meeting, I may or may not receive "a gift of tongues" or other gift.
If you don't accept the simple private/public distinction you aren't going to understand "the gifts" passage, or salvation, or love. Most religious organisations (I won't call them churches cos Jesus only set up 1 church, he isn't confused) have replaved the bible teaching on rceeiving the Spirit with "confess Jesus as your Lord & saviour and you are saved", or "pray the sinners prayer" etc, both man-made, words-only "gospels" that won't save you.