THE FUNDAMENTAL FLAW(S) IN PENTECOSTALISM

In this thread I intend to discuss a fundamental flaw in Pentecostalism. Since renouncing Pentecostalism some 18 months ago, I've taken sometimes to study the phenomena from "outside". I came across this one verse in the whole of scriptures that I believe a poor understanding of, on the part of these charismatics, is the root of the whole error in the Pentecostal movement. If this verse was understood in the right way in which its author meant it, the Pentecostals movement would have been long dead. Here is the scriptures:

1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

I will be discussing four things from that verse to prove the flaw in the whole matter of Speaking with Tongues. To do this I will employ the larger context of the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 14, Acts 2 and the whole bible itself. Here are the four points:

1. Unknown Tongue.
2. Speaking to God not men.
3. No man Understands him.
4. Speaking Mysteries.

1. Unknown Tongue

We need to establish a quick fact that the word"unknown" is nowhere in the original Greek of that text. The translators of the KJV introduced the word unknown possibly to make a distinction between a false type of tongues that was common among pagan worshippers and the true type of tongues that existed in the first century. Later in the chapter, the translators used just "tongues" (eg: verse 5) which is believed o refer to the genuine gift of language or tongues. "Unknown tongue" which is singular may be regarded as negative as practiced by pagans and was wholesome gibberish. Tongues on the other hand was genuine.

I'm making this point to put paid to the argument by pentecostals that the gifts of tongues were not meant to be known. On the other hand tongues simply means language. And if anyone has a gift of tongues, such an individual was supernaturally gifted to speak languages he never learnt. This language however was not unknown but a known language.

2. Speaks to God, not to men.

This is the part of verse 2 that says if any man speaks in an unknown tongue, such speaks to God and not to men. Pentecostals use this as a further proof that the gift of tongues as used in prayers was meant for private communion with God. But again this is where they miss it. The word translated "God" in that verse is actually "theo" in Greek. All the concordance I approached are all agreed that theo can be translated as both "God" or "a god". Usually the context of discussion determines which one to use. If indeed the unknown tongues as used by Paul here was actually negative in context or gibberish (as I will still prove later), it is safe to say that Paul use of theo was meant to refer to "a god" not God, since God does not entertain gibberish in prayers.

Many commentators believe that Paul was critiquing the Corinthians chaotic practice of tongues and comparing it with pagan worship. Pagans in those days were known to go into chaotic worship and fall into trance while uttering gibberish or what the KJV calls unknown tongues to the "a god" they were worshipping. The Corinthians being well aware of this practice could understand what Paul was saying.

So rather using it as a justification for using tongues for private prayers, pentecostals need to see that the "speaking unto God" here is actually "speaking unto a god". And in the final analysis, we realize that tongues speaking was meant to be directed at men to understand a revealed message and not God.

3. No Man Understands Him.

Now, here is the biggest blow to the modern practice of tongues. We are told that as stated above, the gift of tongues were not meant to be understood. On the contrary, both the testimony of 1 Cor 14 and Acts 2, where the practice originated, records people understanding tongues:

Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance... 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?... 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

They heard them speak their languages, which they understood as them telling of "the wonderful works of God". In 1 Cor 14 also Paul concern was for the tongues spoken to be interpreted and not just a chaotic mumble as found with pagans. We see immediately that contrary to the belief that Pentecostals teach that there are two types of tongues: one that has interpretation and another that is mystery, meant for God alone,; what we see from scriptures is that there is only one type of tongues and that tongues had interpretations always. It was the pagan tongue, which the KJV called unknown tongue, that had no interpretation. So, indeed there were two types of tongues spoken of in 1 Cor 14: the pagan "unknown tongues" and the true tongued that could be interpreted.

So if you find anyone speaking in tongues around you, simply ask: what are you saying? If they have no interpretation, be sure the individual is uttering pagan babel or gibberish.

Indeed it was the very matter of interpretation that Paul was driving at in 1 Cor 14. He was saying in effect: "guys, don't be like these pagans who speak gibberish, unknown tongues. Rather when you speak in tongues, seek to interpret it. That's the only way you can tell the fake from the genuine".

Now God is my witness and though this experience which I share here is wholly subjective, I must say i have been obeying Paul's call on all tongue talkers to seek interpretations. I spoke in tongues for 16 years and all though the time, intermittently, I asked God for an interpretation of what I was saying. And at the end of 16 years, I got an answer: I had been speaking gibberish or rubbish. Therefore I ceased to talk rubbish and started to talk to God and since then my prayer life has been revolutionized.

4. Speaking Mysteries

Again, the word "tongue" is the old English word for "language". Therefore the term "speaking in tongues" as used in scriptures does not mean speaking mysteries, rather it means speaking in different languages that have meaning. Mystery on the other hand are hidden truths known to initiates in a cult. In the context of 1 Cor 14:2, it meant speaking a language only a god could understand. It was Paul reiterating a known fact that pagans went into trance speaking in unknown tongues to a god who alone understood the language. I have since shown that the biblical gift of languages was directed at men and not to God or a god.

Conclusion

One other thing that shows the inherent flaw in modern tongue speaking is the fact that it edifies self and not the congregation:

1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

See verse 4, that the person who speaks in an unknown tongue, in gibberish, edifies himself only. But prophesy (or forthtelling or preaching) edifies the church. First, we need to understand that the purpose of spiritual gifts were to edify the church the bod of Christ, not self. Therefore we see that Paul is pointing out a contrast here: that while the gift of gibberish in pagan frenzy only edifies one person, the gift of prophesy edifies all.

It leads me to probably the most fundamental flaw of the whole Charismatic movement: Edification of Self. This is the root of the benefit gospel, prosperity message and self help messages. While the true gospel seeks to redeem the lost and edify the church, the false gospel seeks the edification of self. And the whole trouble comes from a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 14:2-4. This scripture was not applauding or recommending self edification, rather it was calling out the negative in it and recommending a better way.

This is the fundamental flaw in Pentecostalism. A misunderstanding of scriptures and the pursuit of self edification.


I invite all to this discuss but crave the input of the following individuals: trustman, Candour, vooks, petres007, Alawaystrue, Goshen360, BabaGnoni, Gombs, SirJohn, MarkMiwerds etc. Seun may also wish to consider it for front page: today or this coming Sunday.

Mature contributions, please.

For more Pentecostal flaws, see:

www.nairaland.com/2699069/tongues-fundamental-flaw-pentecostalism/2#39651307

Heavy stuff. I know in dat passage paul was advising against speaking d 'unknown' in church. He said if there is nobody to interprete then the speaker should sit down and kip shut but i never thought he was drawing a parallel between pagan tongue and christian tongue.
I've gat to read it again.

First of all I would like you to understand the premise of Paul's discuss; This was a note to a fellowship of Christians who meet together to worship God and uphold each others faith through the various ministries that God has given to each of them, for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. This doesn't represent personal prayers or personal devotion, this was as regards ministering to the Church. How many of us have a chance to minister in the current structure of our churches? Well thats another discuss on the organisation of the "CHURCH".

That being said tongues are a gift of the holy spirit(Act 10 vs 44, Act 19 vs 6) and i dare say it can be used in two forms;
1. One in prays to God as in "groanings" as captured in Rom 8 vs 23 the spirit also helps us pray and makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be understood by man Rom 8 vs 26. It is the spirit that gives you utterance to speak in tongues, if you are not prompted, you do not speak (Acts 2 vs 4).
2. And in ministration to the Church in which case it needs to be interpreted by the speaker or by another person who understands the tongue(1 Cor 12 vs 10-11).

Paul's advice; "...covet to prophesy and forbid not to speak with tongues"

***And note what Paul said about when two prophecy...let the other Judge...is the setting of the present Church allowing for this? The problem you have with tongues is it due to the teaching of a singular Pastor? Think on these things!***

Squad, I cannot say I really got your point in the above post. You took so many issues and left them hanging. You could at least have just responded directly to my post. Nonetheless let me see if I can make sense of all you wrote.

Squad4:

First of all I would like you to understand the premise of Paul's discuss; This was a note to a fellowship of Christians who meet together to worship God and uphold each others faith through the various ministries that God has given to each of them, for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. This doesn't represent personal prayers or personal devotion, this was as regards ministering to the Church. How many of us have a chance to minister in the current structure of our churches? Well thats another discuss on the organisation of the "CHURCH".

I'm not sure I said otherwise in my post. Clearly Paul was writing to a church. I mentioned personal prayers bc many pentecostals agree with Paul that worship should not be rowdy and that tongues be private. That's why I mentioned private prayers.

Squad4:

That being said tongues are a gift of the holy spirit(Act 10 vs 44, Act 19 vs 6) and i dare say it can be used in two forms;
1. One in prays to God as in "groanings" as captured in Rom 8 vs 23 the spirit also helps us pray and makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be understood by man Rom 8 vs 26. It is the spirit that gives you utterance to speak in tongues, if you are not prompted, you do not speak (Acts 2 vs 4).

Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

This sort of prayers by the Spirit "cannot be uttered". As long as your speaking in tongues involves utterance, it is not the same with Romans 8:23. Hebrew tells us that Jesus ever liveth to make intercession for the Church. This is the process of the Spirit praying for us. It is a height of prayers our heavenly high priest makes, same way he prayed for Peter on earth before his sifting. It is an act of God's grace and not works or anything anyone can do.

Squad4:

2. And in ministration to the Church in which case it needs to be interpreted by the speaker or by another person who understands the tongue(1 Cor 12 vs 10-11).

Precisely. Except that modern tongue speaking come with no interpretation. Much of it looks a lot like the Corinthian chaos Paul was discouraging in 1 Cor 14.

Squad4:

Paul's advice; "...covet to prophesy and forbid not to speak with tongues"

The truth is that what people call tongues today is not the same thing as the one scriptures teaches. In the final analysis, we must conclude that the gift of tongues has ceased to operate in today's church.

Indeed let people speak with tongues, as long as they can give an interpretation to it. If not you must accept that what you are speaking is gibberish.

Squad4:
***And note what Paul said about when two prophecy...let the other Judge...is the setting of the present Church allowing for this? The problem you have with tongues is it due to the teaching of a singular Pastor? Think on these things!***

My position on tongues come through numerous teachings, investigations, study and prayers. Not just one pastor.

You have asked the pertinent question above: how much of the guidelines enumerated by Paul in 1 Cor 14 on speaking with tongues is followed by modern Pentecostals? I confess absolutely non. How then can you conclude that what you're sating is the biblical tongues when you cannot even follow basic biblical methods to exercise the gifts?

Think on this, too.

I sense a blanket condemnation on the Church, that one thing is not right doesn't mean all is wrong! The whole body of Christ is still being perfected and you don't expect things to be perfect until (Ephesians 4:13 KJV)
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:


That said I would also repeat that I hope your summation on the Church is not based on one gathering you attend, because as of last Sunday I witnessed the speaking of tongues with interpretation, so please be careful how you make such asertions.

I also think you are more of a philosopher who is interested in historical research and logos. I would rather you share spiritual revelations than opinions on bible commentaries. Your whole "gibberish" theory is based on some arguments of some commentators, which I have not necessarily agreed to. Read again you used logic to twist unknown tongue as expressly written in the scriptures to mean known tongue to you.

You keep saying "you must"...no I mustn't!

I will restate my views on the foregoing topic again ;

1. Tongues are used to communicate with God when we cannot express our prayers to him as we should...it is mystery to the "barberian" or "gibberish" as you would call it.

2. Tongues interpreted can be used to minister spirit inspired edifications.

3. Paul places higher importance on prophecy than tongues with relation to the gathering of saints. What he said doesn't mean in personal prayer that you can't "edify" yourself in tongues.

4. When the spirit is "groaning" within you because you can't find words of your own to pray and you open your mouth am sure what others with hear is "gibberish". You might even seem like hannah whose mouth was moving and nothing came out.

5. God Jesus and The Holy Spirit are same; different dimensions of the manifestation of the God Head. So please don't try to separate them, I know Jesus is our high Priest who also announced the coming of the "comforter" who will teach us all things. Even things the apostles didn't know or experience.

God bless you and I hope this is a quest to know him better, not to justify a belief system because God is a spirit and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. God's ways are not logical...they are far removed from what we can understand.

And these would be my last comments!

I sense a blanket condemnation on the Church, that one thing is not right doesn't mean all is wrong! The whole body of Christ is still being perfected and you don't expect things to be perfect until (Ephesians 4:13 KJV)
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Only the spiritually discerned can make such observation.

WinsomeX, i've said it times and times again...if you have a perfect vision or direction of how the church of God should be, what have you done to that effect?

What have you done with the Message of our Lord Jesus Christ? All these write ups will no change anything, get into the streets... Get on your kneels. Simple.

Squad, I have enjoyed the discussion so far and will appreciate it if you hang on a bit. One of the most uncomfortable things to discuss in life is a scrutiny of one's religious perspective. I don't enjoy it too. But the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement is long overdue for such scrutiny. Pls forbear with me a little. Also, as long as there is mutual respect and one party is not unecassarily antagonizing the other, the most difficult theological subject can be discussed. Lastly, I don't open threads to change people's minds. The Holy Spirit alone can do that. My threads INFORM my readers. Such information given with the hope that change might occur. Changes towards a richer christian walk. Now to your post.

Squad4:

I sense a blanket condemnation on the Church, that one thing is not right doesn't mean all is wrong! The whole body of Christ is still being perfected and you don't expect things to be perfect until (Ephesians 4:13 KJV) Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

This is a discussion on a fundamental flaw in Pentecostalism not a condemnation of the church. Such jurisdiction is way beyond me. It is actually directed at the edification of the body towards perfecting it. However, one step to doing something right is to accept where we are doing it wrong. Pentecostals have brought a renewed zeal to evangelism and devotion to the church. Nonetheless, a false concept of tongues opens them up to demonic activities and pursuit of self benefit - the prosperity message.

Squad4:

That said I would also repeat that I hope your summation on the Church is not based on one gathering you attend, because as of last Sunday I witnessed the speaking of tongues with interpretation, so please be careful how you make such asertions.

And I repeat what I'm doing here is not from one source alone. Also, the fact that anyone gave an interpretation to a tongue which you witnessed is not a justification of the practice. 99% of the time, no interpretation follows tongues speaking. While every time folks spoke in tongues in Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14, there was an interpretation. Except it was a pagan babble. I have heard of tongues interpreters in white garment churches. Does that justify the practice? The mere fact that majority of the time, pentecostals have no interpretation for their tongues is proof that it has no root in God.

Squad4:

I also think you are more of a philosopher who is interested in historical research and logos. I would rather you share spiritual revelations than opinions on bible commentaries. Your whole "gibberish" theory is based on some arguments of some commentators, which I have not necessarily agreed to. Read again you used logic to twist unknown tongue as expressly written in the scriptures to mean known tongue to you.

I am not a philosopher in that sense. I'm a Christian minister (Your reference is possibly to my thread on Bible Lessons. Those are notes for church). And I'm sorry if the force of my thinking is challenging yours. One other leading trouble with Pentecostalism is its anti intellectual stance. Pentecostals don't think and that's why your teachers make merchandize of you. When your arguments are defeated, you begin to claim the other person is teaching from logos while you're the possessor of revelations through a rhema. This is not the place to show you that "logos" and "rhema" are synonyms in the Greek used to translate "word". The implication is that there is no special difference between the two words. They are used interchangeably. Kenneth Hagin has however erroneously taught many to regard rhema above logos.

Christianity is pro-thinking and not anti intellectual. If your Christianity does not make sense, it is time to dump it (and that is not meant as an insult).

Squad4:

You keep saying "you must"...no I mustn't!

Forgive my language. It is just a style of writing. Of course you have every right not to... If you wish.

Squad4:

I will restate my views on the foregoing topic again ;
1. Tongues are used to communicate with God when we cannot express our prayers to him as we should...it is mystery to the "barberian" or "gibberish" as you would call it.

There is no shred of scriptural evidence to support this. Every prayer made in the bible was understandable. No one prayed to God in mysterious tongues, including Jesus. Not one. Only 1 Cor 14:2 may be used to justify this position but even that has been clearly refuted by me on this thread.

Squad4:

2. Tongues interpreted can be used to minister spirit inspired edifications.

And I have posited that 99% of the time tongues today come with no interpretation. The 1% interpreted have no credibility.

Squad4:

3. Paul places higher importance on prophecy than tongues with relation to the gathering of saints. What he said doesn't mean in personal prayer that you can't "edify" yourself in tongues.

Well, whether personal or public, no spiritual gift was given to edify self. All were given for the edification of the body, the church. Self edification is not the purpose of spiritual gifts. And if the tongues you speak edifies you, it is not the tongues of the bible.

Squad4:

4. When the spirit is "groaning" within you because you can't find words of your own to pray and you open your mouth am sure what others with hear is "gibberish". You might even seem like hannah whose mouth was moving and nothing came out.

Romans 8:23 clearly states that groaning comes with no utterance. Modern tongues is not only uttered, it comes in noise and confusion. How do you equate such with groaning of Rom 8:23?

Squad4:

5. God Jesus and The Holy Spirit are same; different dimensions of the manifestation of the God Head. So please don't try to separate them, I know Jesus is our high Priest who also announced the coming of the "comforter" who will teach us all things. Even things the apostles didn't know or experience.

I'm sure I've not confused the works of the triune God.

And your last paragraph there is the reason for all these: new revelations. For you to claim that the Spirit of Jesus will teach anyone something he never said through the apostles, and maybe Jesus, is to teach rank heresy.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Let God's curse fall on anyone teaching something new that is not recorded in scriptures. This is the root of all errors: new revelations.

Pls be informed that I live by the testimony of scriptures only. I do not accept fresh revelations.

Squad4:

God bless you and I hope this is a quest to know him better, not to justify a belief system because God is a spirit and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. God's ways are not logical...they are far removed from what we can understand.

God's ways are very logical. He is a God of order, remember? He made the human mind to think and calls us to renew our minds after being saved. He made an orderly world, supremely logical. So logical that years upon years of scientific research has not figured it all out. And the work of his Spirit is very logical and orderly. Do not blame your disorder or absence of logic on the Spirit of Jesus. Blame it on Charismatic Chaos, as John MacArthur will say.

Squad4 post=:
And these 39499761 be my last comments!

Peace.

Let me begin with your last question

An2elect2:

hmmm! caution sir! you are talking about a gift of God here... Are you a cessationist?

I usually try to avoid the name tags but since you've brought it up, yes, I've listened to the Cessationists point of view and agree with them wholeheartedly. If that makes me Cessationist, so be it.

An2elect2:

Wait, are you saying the basis of self edification is the false prosperity gospel?

Yes. That's precisely what I'm saying. I have investigated the Prosperity Message and have seen an undeniable link with Pentecostalism. Pentecostals ultimately become Prosperity Gospellers - either as extreme or moderate Prosperity Gospelers.

And much of that error is rooted in the thinking that 1 Cor 14:4 teaches self edification through tongues, when in actual fact it was contrasting an evil with a good. There is not one instance in scripture where spiritual gifts is used for the possessor's benefit or edification. Every time the gifts of the Spirit ministered to and edified the church.

If however you can locate a scripture that teaches self benefit or edification with spiritual gifts, please refer me there. As much as I know, gifts edified others not the possessor.

An2elect2:

And are you also saying if i don't understand what i am saying, then its gibberish?

Precisely.

But even more: 1 Cor 14 teaches two types of tongues: 1. Unknown tongue (singular). 2.Tongues (plural). The unknown tongues is believed to be Paul referring to the pagan type of tongues. That was practiced in the same manner modern Pentecostals do. The other, tongues, is genuine. But it ALWAYS came with an interpretation.

My point is that since almost always today's tongues are never interpreted, they can be equated with pagan tongues. And, yes, can be called gibberish.

Winsomex,
In another whatsapp group I belong a member 'pondered' what is in a name. He 'wondered' why the name of God/Jesus changes across languages while our names remain the same. The fella is Robert and he insisted that since he remains Robert whether in Mandarin or Arabic, Jesus' 'original' name should remain. He then 'wondered' what Jesus' original name is. A quick look at his posts and I knew my buddy had fallen for the SNM (Sacred Name Movement) wiles. Robert would not admit that he was exploring this new doctrine but rather he presented the questions as his own. The problem is I have heard these questions and arguments so many times before him and I don't believe in coincidences. He got caught up in another wind of doctrine, and he took to it like a duck to water.

Obviously you have stumbled into ANOTHER attempt to explain away 1 Corinthians 14:2. In a nutshell, this theory claims that sandwiched between Holy Spirit gifts is a parenthesis that briefly touches on paganism.

According to this theory, Paul is saying v1- Pursue Love/charity and desire spiritual gifts especially that you may prophesy v2-BECAUSE whoever speaks in a pagan gibberish language does not speak to men but to gods because nobody understands that rubbish because he speaks hidden truths known to initiates in a cult, v3-but whoever prophesies speaks to others for edification,exhortation and comfort


'Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts especially prophecy [because nobody understands the gibberish pagans are telling their gods] but when you prophesy you edify,exhort and comfort'

'The REASON you should pursue love and desire spiritual gifts especially prophecy is, nobody understands pagan gibberish as it is addressed to gods, but prophecy speaks to others for edifying,exhortation and comfort'

'Pagan gibberish is just for gods, so desire spiritual gifts especially prophecy as prophecy edifies,exhorts and comforts others'

Can you see the logic atrocities you are subscribing ? You are claiming that the BASIS for desiring prophecy is paganism.

Is the subject of verse 2 a Christian, a pagan or a Christian dabbling in paganism?

Look at verse 4
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church

How can pagan mysticism EDIFY?

Winsomex,

The translators of the KJV introduced the word unknown possibly to make a distinction between a false type of tongues that was common among pagan worshippers and the true type of tongues that existed in the first century. Later in the chapter, the translators used just "tongues" (eg: verse 5) which is believed o refer to the genuine gift of language or tongues. "Unknown tongue" which is singular may be regarded as negative as practiced by pagans and was wholesome gibberish. Tongues on the other hand was genuine.

It is true UNKNOWN is interpolation but the purpose is not to distinguish between false and true tongues but rather to distinguish between the supernatural languages and natural learned languages.

UNKNOWN tongues are not 'negative as practiced by pagans' but INCOMPLETE and unhelpful to all (public) but the speaker. This is why Paul prescribes interpretation for these- v13. Why would God add to the 'negative' by having them interpreted?

What is so repulsive in 14:2 that you must twist and wrest it away from its natural context? What are so so determined to avoid?
Please my broda, I know you are busy filing yourself with 'knowledge' but on this matter you are 102% wrong and inconsistent. Study all the occurrences of the UNKNOWN tongue and see there is no paganism there nor is it directed to gods. Whether pagans had tongues as well is not the question, the fact is Paul never even remotely hints at it. Besides, pagans also pray to their deity. Pagans speaking in unknown tongues would not tender the practice unscriptural on this account alone.

Conclusion
1. UNKNOWN tongue(s) as used in the NT wholly refer to a Holy Spirit inspired experience among believers and there is absolutely no basis in isolating a single instance of the phrase and applying it to paganism. This is simply unfounded.

2. There is no distinction between 'tongue', 'tongues', 'unknown tongue' and 'unknown tongues'.

WinsomeX:

But even more: 1 Cor 14 teaches two types of tongues: 1. Unknown tongue (singular). 2.Tongues (plural). The unknown tongues is believed to be Paul referring to the pagan type of tongues. That was practiced in the same manner modern Pentecostals do. The other, tongues, is genuine. But it ALWAYS came with an interpretation.

But my broda,
1 Corinthians 14:27-28 (KJV)
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

How is it that this 'pagan' tongue CAN be interpreted? And according to you, the theo in this verse, is it God or god? If god, isn't that Paul indifference to believers talking to other gods? Is Paul saying that if the UNKNOWN tongue can't be interpreted, the speaker should weak to god(s)?

It is true there are UNKNOWN tongue and tongues but they refer to the same supernatural manifestation of Holy Spirit. Am still wondering why you are driving at this distinction. It must be so important in supporting your position that you don't hesitate to force it and adopt glaring inconsistencies while at it

Just wondering. Do you BELIEVE this yourself, that UNKNOWN tongues are pagan? I notice you are non-commital, you won't outrightly state it as a fact or say you believe it but you ascribe it to others.

Winsomex,
I would love to hear your understanding of the following verse from your unknown tongue vs tongues perspective;

1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

And also this;
1 Corinthians 14:26 (KJV)
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying

Is this tongue your 'unknown tongue (singular) or 'tongues (plural)'?

Please do read this post line upon line,precept upon precept.
Read with any empty mind.As if you know nothing.

the issue of tongues is very controversial just like the subject of tithing.Well that is not my focus today as i will be explaining tongues alone.

the whole confusion of tongues emanated from acts 2.
lets review it from the types and shadows.

the feast of Pentecost is a Jewish custom.
it is called the feast of weeks.7 weeks after the passover.
it is exactly 49 days after the passover.making it the 50th day.
that is where it gets its name from PENTecost. just like PENTagon which means a 5-sided shape.

Read Exodus 12,13. Leviticus 23, Deuteronomy 16. you will find that there.

Many denominations,theologians think that we had many nations gathered in acts 2,more like a UNITED NATIONS GATHERING.
this is very wrong.

the feast of Pentecost is for Jews alone.Jews came from every part of the earth to Jerusalem for this feast.

Just like some of us have ceremonies in our villages that all citizens both home and abroad attends. .


let show you and example.this was far after the Acts 2.


Acts 20:16 For Paul had determined to sail past Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hastened, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.
.
paul is/was a Jew but he lived in Asia at this material point in time,he had to rush down to Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost.
Or would you call Paul an Asian because he lives there? NO!!.
So Pentecost is only for Jews. all those nations listed in Acts 2 are places were jews lived.


Act 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 Now when this was sounded abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because every man heard them speak in his own language.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these who speak Galileans?
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, in which we were born?
Act 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11 Cretans and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.


notice vs 5 Jews came out of every nation under heaven.
Notice the following statements.
Act 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

Act 2:22 You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as you yourselves also know:

notice the bolded.Peter address the whole congregation when he stoof up to preach,see vs 14.
he addressed them as Men of Israel.


Act 2:36 [b]Therefore let all the house of Israel [/b]know assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
.

Again we see that Peter addresses them as the house of Israel.
So everybody at the feast were Jews or Isrealites if you like .

that settled let me deal with the language.
we can see that the events of the Pentecost is the fufilment of prophecy.

Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
Joel 2:29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.

WinsomeX said something like to build a doctrine,there has to be at least 2-3 witnesses,this very scriptural read mattew 18,1cor 14,2cor 13:1.
but on the issue of tongues,it was discussed extensively and emphatically in only one chapter.Theologians call this the LAW OF EMPHATIC MENTION.
Tongues was discussed emphatically there.

lets come back before we lose our focus.
Tongues are not human languages and can never be understood by man except when it comes interpretation.[color].

i will explain extensively.
lets go to 1cor 14.
the word "unknown" in this chapter was put by the translators.this is why you will find it italics in the KJV.
it just funny how that someone can just base an argument on a word that is not in the original text.sorry for WinsomeX.

[color=red]
1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

this is in pellucid terms, Tongues goes to God alone.

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesies speaks unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

prophecies goes to men.

1Co 14:4 He that speaks in an tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesies edifies the church.
tongues only edify the speaker,
prophecies edifies the church,the church here is not the building,its the people in the church.

1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

notice that in the previous verse,we see that prophecies goes to men i.e the church,
look through this verse.
you will see that when a person speaks with tongues and interprets the church receives edifying.Notice the previous verse we read earlier and tell me what you see.if you see what i see i.e

with TONGUES + INTERPRETATION OF TONGUES = The church is edified.
with PROPHECIES = the church is edified.
we can conclude that

TONGUES + INTERPRETATION OF TONGUES = PROPHECIES .

this is clear and translucent enough. Vooks and Gombs are you with me.

it is clear enough that tongues cannot be understood by men.
but Acts 2 seems to contradict this.
Really it is not a contradiction.the contradiction is in our understanding.we fail to understand it.

lets see again
acts 2
Acts2:4 and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to Speak with other tongues,as the spirit gave them utterance.

The word "other" used in this verse,when i checked the greek,
The word "other" is the greek word "heteros".
"heteros" means "of uncertain affinity;strange"


Also from Isaiah's prophecy
Isaiah28:11- "for with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people"

The word stammering used here in the Hebrew means UNINTELLIGIBLE,
while the word another means strange and different

Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe;In my name shall they cast out devils;they shall speak with NEW tongues.
When i checked the word "new"in the Greek. The word is KAINOS
"Kainos" means according to
1)Strong dictionaries
"of Uncertain affinity:new(especially in freshness)"
2)Thayer dictionaries
"fresh,unused,a new kind,unheard of"
3)Wordstudy dictionaries
"Newly made"
Note: NO ACCOUNT ever refer to tongues as some other language belonging to another culture different from the speak! Paul settles this with a well laid out explanation.

1cor14:2:- For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaks not unto men,but unto God:FOR NO MAN UNDERSTANDS HIM/b];howbeit in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

Something else to note
Acts2:13:- Other mocking said,
[b] These men are full of new wine..
lets analyse this statement.
Other said those people speaking with tongues are drunk(full of wine)..
Lets do simple analysis.
In which of these scenarios will someone say you are drunk.
1)You are speaking another man's language fluently or
2)You are just speaking gibberish,unconstructed statements,unintelligible words.
Obviously the answer is Option 2. Because wine cannot make you speak another man's language with respect to the Observers comment in this verse.

Isaiah 28:11 was quoted in 1cor 14:21. dont mind those translators.they acted funny in this very verse.

Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

1Co 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

tongues is not human language.

lets hear from peter.
Act 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
Act 2:15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Act 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

if you read through this verse,you will notice the word PROPHESY is key here.
the events of acts2 goes beyond tongues alone.it is the fufilment of prophecy Joel 2:28.
people did prophesy,people had visions, many things happened.
then i had explained earlier that prophecy is tongues plus interpretation.
An2elect are you with me.?.

lets see another instance
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
scholar8200 is quick to quote this verse,oya come here and understand. .
the folks who came from those regions listed in acts 2 are of Jewish origin. but they lived abroad.there is a possibility that they may have learned the language of where they lived.maybe thats why the statement below was made.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? .

pay attention closely,
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

they said they heard every man in their own tongue where they were born, this refer to their language of origin,their original language where they were originated from.this refers to the original Jewish language.
when they spoke in tongues in acts 2:4,no one could understand but when they interpreted people understood them.
are you here Muttleylaff !!!.
cc winner01,Goshen360,Anas09
that will be all for now.
but wait what of 1cor13:1,i will explain that later.

Ensure you read through and get the information here.before you ask any questions.
i will ignore any question that i have already answered in this post.
it took me time to write this up.
cc WinsomeX,vooks,An2elect.
SELAH

sportsmaster:
lemme book this space .till I get a new laptop charger.
WinsomeX just said nonsense all through that Post.

I will do a series on the subject of tongues for him.

cc vooks, I just finished exams.I will have time to complete my abandoned threads.

He has made many outrageous claims;
1. UNKNOWN is inserted to distinguish genuine spiritual gift of Holy Spirit and pagan experiences
2. UNKNOWN tongue is pagan and different from tongues
3. 1 Cor 14:2 is describing a pagan practice
4. 1 Corinthian 14 mentions (at least) two types of tongues

Shdemidemi was the first guy I met on NL who attempted to distinguish UNKNOWN tongue from tongues. Like I said, the distinction must be so vital to his present beliefs that he is prepared to adopt a baseless and inconsistent position.

Here is the truth;
1. Tongue(s) whenever used with regard to spiritual gifts ALWAYS refer to the Holy Spirit inspired gift
2. There is no paganism in 1 Cor 14:2. Whether there were such pagan practices is irrelevant
3. Tongue,tongues,unknown tongue ALL without exception refer to one and the same gift of the Holy Spirit
4. Winsomex's claims on 1 Cor 14:2 is INTERNALLY inconsistent. It mysteries are hidden truths initiates into cults utter, how come no man understands them? And how different is UNKNOWN tongue of 14:2 from other instances of the same such as v4 where it EDIFIES, v13 where interpretation is prescribed,v14 where where it is praying with one's spirit, and v27 where Paul regulates exercise of the same?
5. Twice in chapter 14 Paul states that speaking in tongues is speaking to God, in verse 2 and verse 28. On what basis is one pagan and not the other? And if BOTH are pagan, why is Paul directing the believer to this instead of censuring idolatry?

Thank you vooks for your well defined observation. I have learnt on public forum not to begin to mention names of sources of teachings bc nl has a way of leaving the doctrine and attacking the source. So to answer your "non-committal" question, I admit immediately that some part of this teachings are not originally mine but others. I have particularly gleaned heavily from John Macarthur's "Truth about Tongues" as he taught on 1 Cor 14. I however I'm committed to the teaching and I consider everything written here as my doctrine not Macarthur's.

One other thing I must say as a matter of introduction is that 1 Cor 14 is a difficult passage of scripture. The inconsistency you have mentioned in all the use of "unknown tongue" following my suggestion that it might be pagan gibberish has been noticed by me too. Nonetheless, I consider these 'inconsistencies' less of a trouble compared with the glaring more inconsistencies in the practice of modern tongues as practiced today. Some are:
1. The fact that tongues are used as personal edification today when all spiritual gifts, including tongues, were meant to edify others, that's the church.
2. The fact that modern tongues comes with no interpretation.
3. And the similarities BTW the old Corinthians disorder and modern Charismatic Chaos.

Having said that, let me attempt to put some consistency in the "inconsistencies" you pointed out.

vooks:

1 Corinthians 14:27-28 (KJV)
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

How is it that this 'pagan' tongue CAN be interpreted? And according to you, the theo in this verse, is it God or god? If god, isn't that Paul indifference to believers talking to other gods? Is Paul saying that if the UNKNOWN tongue can't be interpreted, the speaker should weak to god(s)?

In the Corinthian confusion, what we had was unknown tongues and genuine tongues. So far, one could assume that Paul was looking at the gathering and saying in the above verse: "guys, only one thing can make this "unknown tongues" of yours genuine: interpret. As long as there is no interpreter he should speak to himself or to whatever god is influencing it. The church does not need it"

vooks:

It is true there are UNKNOWN tongue and tongues but they refer to the same supernatural manifestation of Holy Spirit. Am still wondering why you are driving at this distinction. It must be so important in supporting your position that you don't hesitate to force it and adopt glaring inconsistencies while at it

I'm not driving at a distinction. The text clearly shows it. Our own understanding has been beclouded by years of false practice. 1 Cor 14:2 clearly shows that the unknown tongues could not be understood. But the same chapter still describes another "tongues" that can be interpreted and understood. Even Pentecostals admit there are two tongues here: one for prayers that cannot be understood and one for church edification that can be understood. What they never knew was that the former, the one they think they can use to pray, is actually pagan gibberish bc all true biblical tongues were understood in the last analysis.

vooks:
Just wondering. Do you BELIEVE this yourself, that UNKNOWN tongues are pagan? I notice you are non-commital, you won't outrightly state it as a fact or say you believe it but you ascribe it to others.

Like I have said, my teachers vary but Macarthur's been very helpful. I'm indeed committed to this doctrine.

vooks:

Winsomex,
I would love to hear your understanding of the following verse from your unknown tongue vs tongues perspective;

1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Now if you're talking about inconsistency, this is first verse you should have thrown up. But all the same we can still find consistency in it.

Note first, the three inconsistencies of modern tongues, which i mentioned earlier, which this passage clearly defines.

Secondly, Paul is speaking here about tongues. Note that the word "unknown" is suggested by the interpreters. Could it be that the inconsistency is not in the original intent of the passage but in the interpreter's. Obviously that verse 14 should have read:

1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

If you read it without the "unknown", the consistency return except that the singular is an obvious reference to a singular Paul speaking a singular tongue or language which he can interpret.

vooks:

And also this;
1 Corinthians 14:26 (KJV)
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying Is this tongue your 'unknown tongue (singular) or 'tongues (plural)'?

Here the unknown is very rightly not placed by the interpreters of the KJV and a singular person is seen to bring a singular tongue here.

sportsmaster:
lemme book this space .till I get a new laptop charger.
WinsomeX just said nonsense all through that Post.

I will do a series on the subject of tongues for him.

cc vooks, I just finished exams.I will have time to complete my abandoned threads.

Young man, you're welcome. First I would like to advice you to let down that air of pride or superiority reeling in this post of yours. We are all learning here and the number one rule for learning is humility. Do not extinguish whatever else you may want to say with that feeling of pride bc it will defeat your purpose here as the Spirit who inspires us does not do so with pride.

Also let your words be seasoned with grace. "Nonsense" is not a fitting term for saints in describing the works of another.

WinsomeX:

Thank you vooks for your well defined observation. I have learnt on public forum not to begin to mention names of sources of teachings bc nl has a way of leaving the doctrine and attacking the source. So to answer your "non-committal" question, I admit immediately that some part of this teachings are not originally mine but others. I have particularly gleaned heavily from John Macarthur's "Truth about Tongues" as he taught on 1 Cor 14. I however I'm committed to the teaching and I consider everything written here as my doctrine not Macarthur's.

Fair enough

One other thing I must say as a matter of introduction is that 1 Cor 14 is a difficult passage of scripture. The inconsistency you have mentioned in all the use of "unknown tongue" following my suggestion that it might be pagan gibberish has been noticed by me too.

Am struggling to see any difficulty in 1 Cor 14. The difficulty is in seeing your 'difficulties'

Nonetheless, I consider these 'inconsistencies' less of a trouble compared with the glaring more inconsistencies in the practice of modern tongues as practiced today. Some are:
1. The fact that tongues are used as personal edification today when all spiritual gifts, including tongues, were meant to edify others, that's the church.
2. The fact that modern tongues comes with no interpretation.
3. And the similarities BTW the old Corinthians disorder and modern Charismatic Chaos.

When you say scripture has reference to paganism and it is referring to the work of Holy Spirit, you do blaspheme greatly. This is why I narrowed down to your claims. Your position on tongues is secondary to me for now.

Paul is quite clear that uninterpreted tongues have no place in public worship. It is plain impolite speaking a language your hearers can't understand. But one need not invent and insert paganism in 1 Cor 14:2 to arrive at this. This is wresting with scriptures

Note this. Paul does not dismiss unknown tongues that is uninterpteted, he relegates them to private worship

Having said that, let me attempt to put some consistency in the "inconsistencies" you pointed out.

Great. Just to mention the inconsistency is with your particular (mis)understanding of a simple text and not the text itself.

In the Corinthian confusion, what we had was unknown tongues and genuine tongues. So far, one could assume that Paul was looking at the gathering and saying in the above verse: "guys, only one thing can make this "unknown tongues" of yours genuine: interpret. As long as there is no interpreter he should speak to himself or to whatever god is influencing it. The church does not need it"

You need to come CLEAR on this. Are UNKNOWN tongues fake?

And no, Paul is not giving a test of genuine tongues, he simply regulates exercise of the gifts including prophecy

I'm not driving at a distinction. The text clearly shows it. Our own understanding has been beclouded by years of false practice. 1 Cor 14:2 clearly shows that the unknown tongues could not be understood. But the same chapter still describes another "tongues" that can be interpreted and understood. Even Pentecostals admit there are two tongues here: one for prayers that cannot be understood and one for church edification that can be understood. What they never knew was that the former, the one they think they can use to pray, is actually pagan gibberish bc all true biblical tongues were understood in the last analysis.

First,
Am familiar with tongues for prayers and tongues for prophecy distinction and it is as baseless as your 'unknown tongue are fake while tongues are genuine'. Yours unfortunately I find more confused. Your own understanding had equally been beclouded by your sources.

There is a gift of interpretation of tongues. And it is clear not ALL have it. It is also clear that those speaking in tongues were to pray for interpretation, and until then they were to remain silent in public worship. If tongues were always understood, there would have been no need for these instructions by Paul. Interpretation is a gift that elevates the gift of tongues to prophecy.

Like I have said, my teachers vary but Macarthur's been very helpful. I'm indeed committed to this doctrine.

Does MacArthur specifically teach that 1 Cor 14:2 is a reference to pagan worship, and that theo there is a god?

WinsomeX:


Young man, you're welcome. First I would like to advice you to let down that air of pride or superiority reeling in this post of yours. We are all learning here and the number one rule for learning is humility. Do not extinguish whatever else you may want to say with that feeling of pride bc it will defeat your purpose here as the Spirit who inspires us does not do so with pride.

Also let your words be seasoned with grace. "Nonsense" is not a fitting term for saints in describing the works of another.

have you read ,Paul's rebuke concerning false doctrines.?

WinsomeX:


Now if you're talking about inconsistency, this is first verse you should have thrown up. But all the same we can still find consistency in it.

Note first, the three inconsistencies of modern tongues, which i mentioned earlier, which this passage clearly defines.

Secondly, Paul is speaking here about tongues. Note that the word "unknown" is suggested by the interpreters. Could it be that the inconsistency is not in the original intent of the passage but in the interpreter's. Obviously that verse 14 should have read:

1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

If you read it without the "unknown", the consistency return except that the singular is an obvious reference to a singular Paul speaking a singular tongue or language which he can interpret.



Here the unknown is very rightly not placed by the interpreters of the KJV and a singular person is seen to bring a singular tongue here.

It is disingenuous of you to dismiss UNKNOWN as erroneous when it does not serve your purposes and correct when you think it does.

Will respond more fully later

This just got interesting... I'm too busy oooo... But, not after today.

Y'all will get my deserved attention tomorrow! Vooks, you the man... Of the moment...


Cheers

WinsomeX:


Now if you're talking about inconsistency, this is first verse you should have thrown up. But all the same we can still find consistency in it.

Remember the inconsistency is in your constructs not the verse. To me and all honest believers, the verse has some simple truths that even a heathen can comprehend namely, praying in tongues is not a mental exercise.

Note first, the three inconsistencies of modern tongues, which i mentioned earlier, which this passage clearly defines.

Apples to oranges. I can't note any of your points from this verse. Whether they are right or wrong is another thing altogether

Secondly, Paul is speaking here about tongues. Note that the word "unknown" is suggested by the interpreters.

No sir, Paul is talking about an unknown tongue while Winsomex is reading tongues. Did Holy Spirit inspire the plural or was it interpolation?
1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Could it be that the inconsistency is not in the original intent of the passage but in the interpreter's. Obviously that verse 14 should have read:

1 Corinthians 14:14 (KJV)
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

If you read it without the "unknown", the consistency return except that the singular is an obvious reference to a singular Paul speaking a singular tongue or language which he can interpret.

My broda you need to make up your mind on whether UNKNOWN are accurate interpolations or not. This poses a huge dilemma for you because if we removed them as you are trying here, we should remove EVERY instance of the word UNKNOWN. This means you should never use UNKNOWN to point out to fake pagan tongues. You now have tongue and tongues alone to advance your theory,and I will gladly ask you to point out genuine tongue(s) from the fakes. On the other hand if you accept the interpolation as accurate, your distinction of the two types of tongues falls flat on this verse.

Secondly and most importantly, you err in claiming that the singular is an 'obvious reference to a singular Paul speaking a singular tongue or language'. It just,man sorry to say, don't make ANY sense.

The 'singular Paul' in v18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: uses plural. This tells me the singular tongue and the plural tongues can be used for an individual.

Here the unknown is very rightly not placed by the interpreters of the KJV and a singular person is seen to bring a singular tongue here.

But this is unfounded because a singular person Paul utilizes BOTH tongues and tongue when referring to himself

V6 (KJV) Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues,
V14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
v18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

Interesting enough,
1 Corinthians 12:10 (KJV)
to another divers kinds of tongues
A singular person gets plural tongues. So the plural/singular tongue(s) is not dictated by pthe number of individuals exercising the gift. This in turn means your claim that v26 singular tongue was Tongues and not UNKNOWN Tongue but utilized the singular because one individual was the subject of the statement is false

My broda there are times am highly persuaded you are interested in the Truth but at other times as this, you convince me beyond doubt that you have little interest outside toying with the most CURRENT fad theology you came across.

Briefly,
1. UNKNOWN is translator's interpolation
2. UNKNOWN is used 6 times in 1 Corinthians 14 and without exception with the singular tongue-v2,4,13,14,19,27
3. There are 2 instances of singular tongue in the same chapter without the UNKNOWN interpolation- v13 and v26, and v26 is beyond doubt talking about the gift.
4. Tongue and tongues are used for individuals
5. There is ZERO basis for isolating one of the 6 UNKNOWN tongue instances and reading paganism in it
6. No gift of tongue or tongues is forbidden, they are just regulated

And this is specifically for Winsomex. Cessationists love vilifying and ridiculing exercise of spiritual gifts and MacArthur has said worst things about them. But you cross the line when you ascribe to Paul things he never said just to bolster your 'modern tongues are/resemble pagan practices' narrative

Thanks vooks, you have enlightened me here.

ABDULADINO:
Thanks vooks, you have enlightened me here.

Not unto me but to God be the glory if I have shared a truth with you sir

The pentecostals will soon display their ignorances

cc winner01,Gombs,Muttleylaff.
Only a fool would say or would think that the gifts of the spirit has ceased .

cc vooks,WinsomeX,An2elect

Vooks, Let me respond to the matter of pagan worship and the fact that modern tongue speaking is one and the same. My reference remains 1 Cor 14:2 -

1 Corinthians 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

In the opening statement of this thread, I showed clearly that the tongue or language Paul describes in this verse has 3 xtics:

1. They're not understandable.
2. They were mystery languages.
3. They were spoken to "theo": God or a god - the context telling us which is which.

The testimony of Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 shows clearly that true biblical tongues are understandable. That these tongues were not mystery languages but languages that could be interpreted. This is the scripture modern Pentecostals latch on to justify unintelligible gibberish. Unfortunately no scripture tells us tongues are unintelligible. No one prayed with unintelligible tongues in the bible. Jesus never did. Where then do Pentecostals get there example: pagans. Consider this quote from the an article online:

But this practice(tongues) is not only a recent phenomenon, but was common in pagan worship long before Christ came. Robert G. Gromacki, in The Modern Tongues Movement
(pp 5-10), documents the history of “speaking in tongues” in antiquity. Some of these ecstatic babbling were reported in the “Report of Wenamon” (about 1100 BC), Plato’s Dialogues (5th century BC), and Virgil’s Aeneid (1st century BC). The Graeco- Roman mystery religions before and after the Christian era most probably practiced these babbling utterances.

The article is titled: THE PAGAN ORIGIN OF MODERN TONGUES. Note the fact that it was a cultural norm in the first century. www.twoagespilgrims.com/doctrine/the-pagan-origin-of-modern-speaking-in-tongues/

When we read the NT we must understand that the epistles were written to a people, with a challenge, living within a defined culture. Corinth was a cosmopolitan city with pagan worship everywhere. The biggest challenge of that church was divorcing pagan/worldly influences from its style of worship. Consider this long quote from John MacArthur as he introduces his sermons on 1 Cor 14 -

"Now, such ecstasies and ecstatic speech is very common in pagan religion. And I’m not going to take the time this morning to go from one end of the world and one end of history to the present to prove that, but I want you to understand that. That this is a very common thing in pagan religion. I was reading an article this week about how common it is among the Zulus in Africa, this kind of ecstatic, gibberish speech. And we’ve discussed that in the past. But let me give you a little background on the Corinthian situation. Remember that, for the most part, the Corinthians had allowed the entire world system in which they existed to infiltrate their assembly. For example, they were all hung up with human philosophies, the first four chapters say. They had a hero worship cult just like their society did; Chapter 3 talks about that. They were involved in terrible, gross, sexual immorality; Chapters 5 and 6 talks about that. They were suing each other in the court; Chapter 6 talks about that. They had fouled up the home and marriage and misevaluated that whole thing; Chapter 7 talks about that. They were all confused about pagan feasts and idolatry and things offered to idols; Chapters 8, 9 and 10 talks about that. They had goofed up the proper place of women in the church; Chapter 11 talks about that. They had misconstrued the whole dimension of spiritual gifts; Chapter 12 talks about that. And they had lost hold of the one great thing, love; Chapter 13 talks about that. They had let the entire mass of the Satanic system that existed in their society infiltrate the church. And once it came in, in with it came pagan style of religion, with all of the ecstasies and all of its eroticisms and all of its sensualities. They bought the whole bag, and so the whole thing is a confused amalgamation of truth and error.

A modern parallelism would be that of Roman Catholicism, which is a combination of Christianity out of the Bible and ancient Baal worship, and the Mother and Child cult that was originally known as Ashtoreth and Tammuz. The same thing occurred in the Corinthian church. It was Christianity in part and paganism in part, all wedded together.

If you study the Greco-Roman world in the time of the Corinthian church, you would know that they had various priest and priestesses, and people who were devotees of the gods would go to these great temples and they would worship these priests and priestesses. And it was very common for a devotee would go into an ecstasy. And ecstasy means “to go out of oneself.” That’s the literal meaning of the word, to go out of yourself. They would literally flip out and they would go into an unconscious state, in which they would have all kinds of phenomena occur, a psychic kind of phenomena. They would believe that when they went out of themselves, they literally left the body, and they ascended into space and they connected to deity, whatever deity they were worshiping, and they began with the deity. And once they began to commune with that deity, they would begin to speak the language of the gods. This was a very common thing in their culture. So the term used in Corinthians, glssais lalein, to speak in tongues, was not invented by Bible writers, but was a term used commonly in the Greco-Roman culture to speak of pagan ecstasy and going out of the body, connecting with the deity and, in a mystical way, beginning to speak the language of the gods, which came out as some kind of gobbledygook and gibberish.

Now, the Greeks even had a word for this ecstatic religious experience. You’ll be interested to know what the word was. It was the word “eros.” Remember that word? We sometimes translate it as sensual love. But the word is a bigger word than that; it has a broader meaning. The word eros simply means “the desire for the sensual” or “the desire for the erotic,” or “the desire for the ecstasy,” or “the desire for the ultimate experience or the feeling.” And the kind of religion they had was erotic religion. It was religion designed to be felt. It was sensual, ecstatic kind of religion. And you’ll remember, if you studied those religions, that when they went to those temples and to those priestesses to worship, they actually entered into orgies, didn't they. And that whole idea of erotic and sexual and sensual and ecstatic and the gibberish that went on with divine utterances, all was rolled into one big ball under the mystery religions that had spawned in Babylon and had come into the Corinthian society. And I’m not going to take the time to read you all of the information on that, but there is tremendous historical information that tells us that this did occur.

Now, I’m afraid that what has happened today in the Charismatic movement is just a reproduction of exactly what happened in Corinth. The church, because of a deadness and because of years of ignorance of the true work of the Holy Spirit, and because of a lack of really fine Bible teaching in many places, and because of the, just the dearth of anything really significant going on, people in the church began to reach out and to want to feel God and to sense reality. And Satan’s counterfeit came flooding in the door, and what happened now, in the Charismatic Movement, is simply Corinth revisited. The church has married the system of pagan religion again, and we have developed a sensual, feeling, experiential, erotic kind of approach to religion. Only we call it the work of the Holy Spirit when, in fact, it is the counterfeit of Satan. If you were to find time to talk with various people who have been involved in it, you would find that some of their experiences are very much in that way, very sensual, very feeling-oriented.

I have a letter in my hand, which I won’t take time to read…but probably will incorporate in the book…which is from a lady in our church who was sharing with me the amazing experience that she had when they tried to get her to speak in tongues. And there was the lying on the floor, and all kinds of various things that occurred that were very much oriented toward the emotion and stimulating the feeling, and not the thinking and the mind, as the Word of God would indicate.

Now, to give you another illustration, there is the…there's a pamphlet written by a former leader of the Pentecostal movement in which he gives a testimony, and this is what he says: “Finally, I went to the mission at 328 W. 63rd Street, Chicago, and asked only one question. ‘Why do I not receive the baptism? What is the matter with me?’ The good friends prayed with me and said nothing was wrong, I only needed to wait. “Praise the Lord they were right. “For the first time I knelt at the altar on Sunday afternoon, March 17, the power began to seize me and I laughed all through the following communion service. In the evening, about 11 p.m., I knelt with a few of the friends praying for me (Elder So-and-So placed his hands on my head for a short time, several times during the afternoon and evening). And after some little waiting I began to laugh, or rather my body was used to laugh with increasing power until I was flat on my back laughing at the top of my voice for over half an hour. “On raising, I found that I was drunk on the new wine, acting just like a drunken man in many ways and full of joy. On kneeling to meet the Lord again, I was suddenly seized with irresistible power of beseechings with groanings that could not be uttered, asking the Lord to have mercy on me a sinner, and telling Him that I wanted to go all the way with Him. The power of this praying was too great for me to endure, and suddenly my eyes opened to see Elder So-and-So, who had been standing a few feet away, fall as though he had been struck. I was relieved, and in a few seconds was straight up in the air screaming ‘Glory!’ at the top of my voice. “Again kneeling, my eyes grew dark, and I was rolled over to the floor, lying there for some time nearly unconscious. Then coming to and kneeling, I felt my jaws and mouth being worked by a strange force. In a few seconds, some baby gibberish was uttered, then a few words in Chinese that I understood, and then several sentences in a strange tongue. This turned into singing, and I did not again speak in tongues until Wednesday, three days later.” Now, what is going on there? All kinds of feeling experiences, all kinds of emotionalism, all kinds of sensual things in the broadest term of sensual, that is, apprehended by the senses rather than the mind. This was very common to pagan religion. Plato, in his dialogues…and, incidentally, Plato lived from 429 to 347 B.C., before Christ. And in his Dialogues, he has page after page after page describing these pagan ecstasies of speech. This was not anything that belonged to Christianity. In Christianity, it was the true gift of languages, used only when somebody who spoke the language was present in order that it might be a sign that God was there and that God’s people were speaking God’s truth. Never was it intended to be confused with paganism. But, as always, whenever God does something, Satan counterfeits it, doesn’t he? And that confuses the issue. And so Satan’s smokescreen to cloud the true revelatory work of the Holy Spirit in the early church were phony revelations and phony visions and phony tongues. And that’s why, 1 John, John says when somebody comes along and starts telling you they speak for God, you’d better “test the spirits.” It’s easy to fall prey to the phony. And the Corinthians, because they had decided to marry the spirit of the age, were victims. Now remember, Satan is called “the god of this age,” Satan is called “the spirit who energizes the children of disobedience.” Satan is the one who wants to be like God and Satan appears “transformed as an angel of light.” He wants to counterfeit reality; he wants the church to buy a phony. That’s his business.

And so we see in heathenism all that fake, and here, in Corinth, it had engulfed the church. And I’m afraid it’s doing the same today. There are no ecstasies, no sensualities, no eroticisms, no going out of yourself ever associated in the New Testament with the true work of the Holy Spirit. Never. Never. In fact, in 14:32 it says, “The spirits of the prophets must be subject to the prophets.” Nobody ever gives up his spirit; nobody ever loses control; nobody ever goes out of himself in terms of that which God has designed. And that’s why, at the end of the 14th chapter, the final word of the apostle Paul’s final is, “Let everything be done decently,” and what? “in order.” This is not the Holy Spirit’s way. It is not the Holy Spirit’s way to have everybody jumping up, and everybody has a Psalm – “ verse 26 “ – and everybody a doctrine and everybody a revelation and everybody an interpretation, and everybody wanting to speak in ecstasy, and everybody wanting to have a vision, and so forth. That’s the confusion of paganism that has engulfed the church. And I mean it was sophisticated stuff. The mystery religions of Babylon that had dominated the time of the Corinthian culture, they had developed all kinds of rites and rituals and vows and baptisms, and animal sacrifices and feasts and fasts and ablutions for sin, like dunking in a frozen river or crawling on your knees for miles. They had all kinds of things that were phony religious things, and ecstatic speeches and visions and prophecies were all a part of it. And they had all come to Corinth, and to assemble with the Corinthian Christians was to enter a situation of absolute chaos, total chaos. Do you know that 12th chapter says that people were actually standing up and cursing Jesus in tongues, and people were saying, “Oh, it must be the Holy Spirit”? That’s why he says, “The Holy Spirit doesn't call Jesus accursed.” Just confusion. The wild frenzy of the Greek paganism became madness in the Corinthian church.” And one writer says, “They, like the pagans, no doubt uttered And one writer says, “They, like the pagans, no doubt uttered their ecstatic speech with foaming lips and streaming hair.” And, beloved, as much as I wish it weren’t true, I’m convinced that today what we see in the Charismatic movement is the same kind of engulfing of the church in pagan religion. A counterfeit has been accepted because it impacts the emotions of people, who for a long time have sat in a church where they never got anything that changed their lives. And so Paul writes the 14th chapter to correct it."

My apologies for such a lengthy lost but it was needed seeing that I'm being accused of blasphemy already.

Now my summation on this thread is simple: 1 Cor 14 teaches two types of tongues and virtually on Pentecostals agree to this. One is the prayer tongue directed to God, unintelligible, not subject to interpretation, etc. The other is the interpretable tongue. My contention is that Paul was talking of two tongues also, but one is pagan babble. The other the genuine tongue. I'm saying that the pagan babble is what modern Pentecostals speak. If this is not so then respond to my three points challenge earlier:

1. Show us where else the bible teaches that tongues or any other gift of the Spirit where given for self benefit or edification?
2. Tell us what tongues spoken today by Pentecostals cannot be interpreted.
3. Tell us in honest fact if you cannot see a similarity BTW the Corinthian Confusion and modern Charismatic Chaos.

To avoid repetition, I shall not be discussing matters I've trashed on this thread. And I'm convinced I am done with the matter of tongues being pagan babble. Everyone has a right to their opinion.

Cheers.

vooks:
Briefly,
1. UNKNOWN is translator's interpolation
2. UNKNOWN is used 6 times in 1 Corinthians 14 and without exception with the singular tongue-v2,4,13,14,19,27
3. There are 2 instances of singular tongue in the same chapter without the UNKNOWN interpolation- v13 and v26, and v26 is beyond doubt talking about the gift.
4. Tongue and tongues are used for individuals
5. There is ZERO basis for isolating one of the 6 UNKNOWN tongue instances and reading paganism in it
6. No gift of tongue or tongues is forbidden, they are just regulated

And this is specifically for Winsomex. Cessationists love vilifying and ridiculing exercise of spiritual gifts and MacArthur has said worst things about them. But you cross the line when you ascribe to Paul things he never said just to bolster your 'modern tongues are/resemble pagan practices' narrative

Vooks, I accept the fact that "unknown" is an interpolation. I also accept the fact that "unknown tongue" is not sufficient evidence to label something pagan, whether as singular or plural as the text clearly shows (And do remember that had used "may" in my OP to suggest this earlier). I however have stated the reason above I'm convinced modern tongues is pagan. Refer.

One other thing I might have left out is this: the fact that modern tongue is used as a means for self edification. I have asked above where else can we find spiritual gifts being used for self edification as all gifts are meant for the body or church edification.

The point I need make here is this; the self edification aim of modern tongue speakers is at the root of the prosperity message that has turned the Christian gospel to a self benefitting one. Pentecostalism leads ultimately to Prosperity Preaching. It is this direct fruit bearing quality of pentecostals that is rock proof that the self edifying aim of their movement through tongues has no root in scripture neither is it authored by God's Holy Spirit.

WinsomeX:


Vooks, I accept the fact that "unknown" is an interpolation. I also accept the fact that "unknown tongue" is not sufficient evidence to label something pagan, whether as singular or plural as the text clearly shows (And do remember that had used "may" in my OP to suggest this earlier). I however have stated the reason above I'm convinced modern tongues is pagan. Refer.

Winsomex,
This is not a case of insufficient evidence but ZERO evidence at all. There is no possibility that ANY of the 6 instances of UNKNOWN tongues refer to anything other than the gift of the Holy Spirit. So your fence-sitting 'may' does not count unless you demonstrate how, which you haven't so far. When busy filling up yourself with knowledge, you need to be impartial enough to call out heresies and lies. You also owe it to your fellow brothers in Christ a duty of care so you don't peddle them. You are stumbling some who can't see through these lies.

One other thing I might have left out is this: the fact that modern tongue is used as a means for self edification. I have asked above where else can we find spiritual gifts being used for self edification as all gifts are meant for the body or church edification.

You want to ask yourself why you are looking for this ELSEWHERE. Exactly what does Paul mean by this verse? Why would you run all over while ignoring this verse? Is there a better depiction of intellectual dishonesty? This is worse; this is scoffing the very Word of Life
1 Corinthians 14:4 (KJV)
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church

And suddenly I have an epiphany. I now know why your sources vainly strive to distinguish UNKNOWN tongue from tongues; the whole point is to neuter this verse!

While ideally tongue(s) should be interpreted so all can be edified just as prophecy, the gift in and of itself doth EDIFY the speaker.

The point I need make here is this; the self edification aim of modern tongue speakers is at the root of the prosperity message that has turned the Christian gospel to a self benefitting one. Pentecostalism leads ultimately to Prosperity Preaching. It is this direct fruit bearing quality of pentecostals that is rock proof that the self edifying aim of their movement through tongues has no root in scripture neither is it authored by God's Holy Spirit.

The point I must make is uninterpteted tongue edifies the speaker alone while interpreted tongue edifies the hearers just like prophecy. What some make of this edifying is IRRELEVANT to this simple truth. One does not study doctrine from practice but practice proceeds from doctrine. All those arguments you have just strung together are IRRELEVANT in unraveling 1 Corinthians 14:4

vooks:

Winsomex,
You want to ask yourself why you are looking for this ELSEWHERE. Exactly what does Paul mean by this verse? Why would you run all over while ignoring this verse? Is there a better depiction of intellectual dishonesty? This is worse; this is scoffing the very Word of Life
1 Corinthians 14:4 (KJV)
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church
And suddenly I have an epiphany. I now know why your sources vainly strive to distinguish UNKNOWN tongue from tongues; the whole point is to neuter this verse!

The simplest way of exegesis of biblical doctrine is to have at least two scriptures to support it. If Pentecostals use only 1 Cor 14:4 as basis for edification of self and can find no other scripture to either support it or even find some other scriptures that speak of other gift edifying self, they must rest content on the fact that Tongues for Self Edification is false doctrine. Paul stated tongues edifying self in 1 Cor 14:4 in a negative context in contrast with prophesy edifying the church, which is positive.