|Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New|
Stats: 2,483,370 members, 5,623,603 topics. Date: Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 01:31 PM
Do People Who Speak In Tongues Fake It Or Understand It? / 7 Reasons Why Every Believer Should Speak In Tongues - Kenneth E Hagin / Daddy Freeze: "Speaking In Tongues In Nigerian Churches Is Fake” (2) (3) (4)
|I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 5:03pm On May 15|
On my WhatsApp status, I posted on May 2: If you are still speaking in tongues in May, 2020: and Christ hasn’t shown you 1 Corinthians 12:1-3 for you to quit, then what you are doing is an incantation and influenced by an evil spirit.
Then my friend responded: I don't understand. To say am confused is still an understatement, more because I was planning to re-evaluate, fast if possible for that gift.
“All that tongue speaking in many churches is not the true one“, I replied. “All churches do so”, she returned “No. Catholic, Baptist, all reformed churches, Anglican, and Deeper life, don’t practice it”, I countered.
After knowing that she had sought the “gift of speaking in tongues” for years, this led to the exposition on the “gift of tongues” from the Old Testament to New Testament. Here goes the exposition:
“Tongues” means “languages” or “dialects”. The “gift of tongues“ spoken of in the letters of Apostle Luke - Acts of the Apostles, and Apostle Paul, was first spoken of by Prophet Isaiah as the means God will employ in the proclamation of Himself to the Gentiles, in a language understood by them - their own dialect:
Isaiah says: Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people (Isaiah 28:11).
Two verses prior showed the dilemma of interpretation (of God’s message to the Gentiles): "To whom would He teach knowledge, And to whom would He interpret the message? Those just weaned from milk? Those just taken from the breast?(Isaiah 28:9)
The Old Testament summary: God says He would speak to peoples (who did not know Him) in their own tongue (by interpretation).
In the synoptic gospels, Jesus speaks to a Syro-Phoenician woman in her own tongue. (The language of Phoenicia is Punic or Phoenician, Proto Semitic languages). Thereafter, He speaks to a deaf mute in sign language. In Acts 2, the disciples of Jesus spoke about fifteen tongues, languages they’ve never learned, to people from different countries; speaking about things concerning Christ.
Acts 2:8,11: And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? Cretans and Arabs- we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God."
In Acts 10, an Italian, Cornelius, who was kind to the Jews (v.2), spoke in a language understood by the Jews who accompanied Peter; hence, they were astonished (v.45). In Acts 19, the language spoken is impossible to identify. However, a commonality exists with the prior eye-witness accounts - preaching about Christ was happening (v.4&5).
The eye-witnesses’ account summary: The (“new”) language spoken by the Gentile converts occurred during the preaching of the gospel of Christ to them by Jews. Whenever the gift of tongues was in operation Jews were present. The initial preachers to the Gentiles, Jesus Christ and the Apostles, proclaimed the word of God to the Gentiles in Gentile language.
In Apostle’s Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, he addresses the maladies in that church; the build-up to the “problem“ of tongues began in chapter 10. Summarily, the maladies were:
1. In Chapter 10: Idolatry.
2 In Chapter 11: They didn’t imitate Paul and they didn’t imitate Christ; in other words:
A. Natural law for leadership was jettisoned
B. The Lord’s supper was a place of division; and the gathering was a gallery of gluttony.
3: Chapter 12: Chapter 12 is divided into two parts; the two divisions are separated by the word “now” in verse 4 - Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.
(Now: adverb: used, especially in conversation, to draw attention to a particular statement or point in a narrative. )
The word “now” contrasts the malady in verse 1 to 3, with the narrative- the real operation of the Holy Spirit in the Church (1 Corinthians 12:8-30).
The malady shown in first three verses was the infusion of native custom of idol worship into Christianity. In a euphemism, Apostle Paul states the display in the church influenced by the pagan spirit, as revealed itself by an oral expression:
You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. (1 Corinthians 12:2)
Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3)
The content of this speech influenced by this pagan spirit doesn’t proclaim the gospel of Christ - it doesn’t say, “Jesus is Lord”. Paul doesn’t waste his time going into details of how they were “carried away” when he says: “somehow or another”.
However, In Ifá worship for instance, the devotee are carried away to the deity by way of the ògèdè/ọfọ̀ spoken by the Babaláwo. Just like Isaiah wrote: They will say to you, "Seek oracles at the pits used to conjure up underworld spirits, from the magicians who chirp and mutter incantations.
The muttering that went on in the Corinthian church was incantation-like: the tongue in verse 3, was done in a display (like those done when the heathen appear before their pagan deities).
Later in Chapter 12:10, Paul speaks of another kind of tongues, different from that spoken of in verse 2. The incantation-like expression spoken of in verse 2 is in contrast to the tongues in verse 10 which is in plurality as verse 28 shows - various languages. The gift of tongues in chapter 12:10 walks in tandem with all the gifts of the spirit; none working independently; Where the gift of “word of wisdom” was, “tongues” will be in effect; Where there were apostles, prophets and teachers carrying on with the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the gifts in unison would verify their ministry. From the tone of rebuke in chapter 10 and 11, the tongue displayed in verse 2, was done by all and sundry. Paul ends the chapter by stating the inferiority of those gifts including “the gift of tongues”.
There are nine gifts spoken of in chapter 12. Three of them make their way into the next chapter. Then Paul speaks of these inferior gifts in detail; and how their inferiority comes with their expiration.
The next chapter presented the ultimate gift - love. In chapter 13:8, Paul says: “Love never fails”. “Fail”, katargeō in Greek language means “expire”. Then he speaks of the manner of expiration the gifts in chapter 12 would occur:
1. Prophecies will fail: Failure indicts that it will not stand the test of time.
2. Tongues will cease: “Cease” means to stop completely or come to an end.
3. Knowledge will vanish away: “Vanish away” means to fade away. It brings to mind how the gas in a gas cylinder begins to die off until it is empty.
Chapter 13:9 says, the prophecy made by the apostles, prophets and teachers, and the knowledge they possess is partial (incomplete). Then, Chapter 13:10 shows that those gifts were for the church in its tender years. However, when the church is mature, those gifts will finally give way. Paul says, “the perfect will come, then the partial gifts will be discarded“.
So, what then is the perfect (gift)? The perfect (gift) cannot be the coming of Christ because of the qualities associated with the gifts - failure and vanishing. At the coming of Christ, all things stop.
The earlier verses says, it is love. Much more, John in his first epistle says, it is love. What then is this love that shows up when the church has left its childish state? Paul says, it is the truth in love, the full knowledge of the Jesus, the Gospels of Christ (Eph. 4:13-16, 2 Tim.3:16-17); John says, “but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him”. The word of God is termed “love”.
Finally, we have a verse in the scriptures if not handled carefully throws everything said by the prophet into the flames - 1 Corinthians 14:2: For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.
“This chapter is crowded with difficulties“, so says Adam Clarke about 1 Corinthians 14. To understand one pagan affiliation, it would be important to look at another pagan affiliation one is familiar with so that the difficulties Adam Clarke speaks of will be averted. In Ifá worship, it is typical that when the Babaláwo begins to mutter the ọfọ̀, an ọ̀gbẹ̀rì would not understand. In the Babaláwo‘s mind, he speaks mysteries (ancient secrets of the past) only Ifá understands; though the Babaláwo may not understand fully, yet he speaks them. The ọ̀gbẹ̀rì doesn’t understand because he is an illiterate with respect to the training one is required to go through to “read” and understand the words of the Babaláwo.
1 Corinthians 14:3 shows that Paul isn’t referring to the traditions mentioned in chapter 12:2; but he is referring to a present unfavorable practice in the church; and the need to desire prophesying (interpretations: v.1).
1. The Babaláwo is the religious equivalent to a Christian minister. In the manner the Babaláwo does, the church ministers at Corinth spoke (without interpretation) to the ọ̀gbẹ̀rì. But this is Christianity not paganism, hence, Paul speaks of the need for the interpretation of the tongue of the text (verse 1&11)
2. The synagogue in the Greek nation of Corinth like in all synagogues Apostle Paul visited, read the Hebrew texts - the Torah (The Five Books of Moses), Nevi'im ('Prophets') and Ketuvim ('Writings'), which make up our Old Testament scriptures. When these texts are read, the congregation of Greeks would never understand; so the purpose of reading is unfruitful, and these leaves the Gentiles with a feeling of disrespect or dissatisfaction; So they might say, “na only him and God understand wetin he dey talk”, so does Paul say: “For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands”. The reader of the Hebrew texts always made a vain effort in communing with the unlearned congregation in a foreign tongue;
Therefore, Paul admonished the gifted to pray and sing the psalms, hymns and spiritual songs according to the spirit of the Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim, and according to the gifted’s mind (“mind” means “mental disposition” or “vital principle”. Mental disposition is what drives our emotions, desires, affection etc.): “I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also”.
The speaker of the foreign tongue spoke mysteries, the verse says. Paul speaks of the ancient texts’ picturesque expressions of Christ as mysteries in Colossian 1:26. He prayed that the Gentiles would understand the mysteries in the Jewish ancient texts concerning the Christ (Eph. 6:19, Col. 4:3, 1:26,27). This made it imperative that the unknown tongue of the Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim needed interpretation and its mysteries uncovered for the benefit of unlearned hearers.
This is why he admonished them in verse 1 not to desire to speak in the Hebrew tongue but to desire to interpret(prophecy) the Hebrew tongue in which Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim were written in, in the Corinth dialect.
What is practiced as the “gift of tongues” by the Pentecostal church and many of its admirers for the better part of the last century is more like the 1 Corinthians 12:2 case. It is not a gospel speaking speech: It is antithetical to the pattern of the scriptures and the spirit of the gospel of Christ. It is contrary to the instruction of the 1689 confession of faith that states that “all parts of religious worship of God are to be performed with understanding”. It churns the stomach of the early church fathers who for the primacy of the people’s edification stated through the principles of the Westminster confession of Faith that: “The goal is the hearers’ understanding of, and growth in, the Word of God, not the display of the preacher’s eloquence or erudition. At least a dozen times the Directory urges plainness or clarity of expression in preaching in order that “the meanest [humblest] may understand.”
I now know why it was sickening for Paul to speak about it. This is a long read but it takes time to dissolve an iceberg; Don’t let it weary you, please. Tongues is not for the real children of God who have found grace in Christ. May the Lord be with us all.
(For the non-Yoruba: ọ̀gbẹ̀rì means unlearned or illiterate. ògèdè/ọfọ̀ means incantations. Babaláwo is the Priest of Ifá. Ifá is the Yoruba divination deity).
Cc: Toyorlee1, Nebes, Maximus69, Eulalia, MuttleyLaff
1 Like 2 Shares
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MightySparrow: 5:34pm On May 15|
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 7:16pm On May 15|
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MightySparrow: 7:20pm On May 15|
Acehart:I have read it
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by vickydankal(f): 7:34pm On May 15|
I can read 500 pages of a book but to do so with phone mbanu not after getting my 2nd glasses. Please summarize
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 7:36pm On May 15|
@OP, I am afraid Paul's message is lost on you.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hupernikao: 7:54pm On May 15|
Are you open to honest discussion and scriptural investigation of your write up?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 8:02pm On May 15|
Hi. I’m happy about your response, trust me. I’d like to know how many commentaries you have read concerning the books of Romans and Corinthians? My kobo, do you speak in tongues?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 8:04pm On May 15|
Yes, I am open to a honest, heart-to-heart discussion, concerning my writeup. I may not respond as quickly as you would like but I sure will respond honestly.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 8:10pm On May 15|
I’m sorry about the long read. Expositions are often written in many words. I wish I could make a shorter, but it would lack zest. Vicky, what phone do you use?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 8:19pm On May 15|
I have on several occassions read the books in question, and don studies on how we arrived at noting them as Paul's writings.
I like to read the books of the bible as if reading through a novel, and so have come to detest the way folks are quick to pull verse out of context to bolster whatever idea they have in their heads, abandoning the very meaning the writer of the full book had for including the verse in question.
"Tongue" refers to a full blown language ofcourse(in it's completeness); and not a bunch of syllables spliced together,and repeated over and over for the sake of attention -- it is nothing more than jibberish (also referred to as glossolalia).
As for speaking in tongues, I do speak a full blown language. In my case, I know the name of the language, and the place and time during which the language was likely spoken. There is no "spiritual" angle to my speaking of this language that I am aware of. It does not only come on when I pray... it comes on whenever and wherever and it does not seem to give a damn who is listening, when or why. On several occassions been given the ability to understand the meaning of the words that flow out of my mouth, and it is refreshing during those times.
I am a curious soul, so I continue to investigate it.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by vickydankal(f): 8:19pm On May 15|
Old iPhone 6. I don’t look at screen for long because of my eyes
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 8:38pm On May 15|
It seems to me that you agree with me on one hand, and on the other hand disagree. Did I pull the texts out of context? Maybe. If Peter had this to say about Paul’s writings: as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction; then I may have pulled verses out of context to bolster whatever idea I have in my head. However, I have not come with my own idea; I have compared scriptures with scriptures, and compared this writeup (without plagiarism) with commentaries I have (I have many of them). If two witnesses don’t agree, isn’t their case thrown out?
I have no agenda; I once practiced glossolalia and I have seen through the scriptures that it doesn’t come from God.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 8:39pm On May 15|
Would you like to buy a new phone, one that makes reading less stressful for you?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 8:47pm On May 15|
Maybe this might help
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 9:00pm On May 15|
I like the Easy-to-read version too. Thanks. I l prefer the NASB though. I may have distorted Paul’s letter but not this one on tongues.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 9:04pm On May 15|
Acehart:Peter never said anything about speaking in tongues in that 2nd letter of his. And Paul's writings never suggest much of what you claim. I wonder if it has to do with reading from a translation that is not clear enough to get one this. OR maybe if you cut your Original writeup down into bits, we might be better able to grasp the converstion contained.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 9:13pm On May 15|
@the bolden: I said Paul’s letter.
I may have to cut my original writeup, definitely. It would be difficult though. Mr Kobojunkie, could you do a study of 1 Corinthians 12:1-3, and tell me you thoughts, please?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 9:17pm On May 15|
What are you expecting me to glean from it as far as this topic is concerned? From the much I have come to understand of your write up, you are telling those who practice glossolalia to essentially cease and desist, am I correct? Only how can they cease that which they believe, and have convinced themselves en masse, is of the spirit of God? How do you expect them to do that?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 9:35pm On May 15|
Those who practice glossolalia should desist. But I am not coming from the back door -imagination but from the front door -reasoning. Will they cease? All Samaria saw Elijah’s fire fall but not one person ceased from following Baal -they continued in that which they believed. It’s not in my power to do the convincing, yet I must speak. If one person out of the mass ceases, then I have fared better than Elijah.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 9:40pm On May 15|
As far as convincing others, I am a firm believer in the message contained in Jeremiah 31 vs 34 ....
34. People will not have to teach their neighbors and relatives to know the Lord, because all people, from the least important to the most important, will know me.” This message is from the Lord. “I will forgive them for the evil things they did. I will not remember their sins.”
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hupernikao: 9:41pm On May 15|
From your write up, i know you believe that the word of God is supreme and authoritative and as such you trust in its explanation when put in proper context. Hence, i will want us to put proper bible interpretation as important in this discussion. That is, we should but away reading our own meaning into the scriptures. We shouldn't stand or drag our own words into the scriptures when it is clear that it isn't written.
Now to the OP
Firstly i will want to discuss and explore the Bible language usage of tongues (as related to the OP) verse by verse before moving to its application and practices in the Bible.
So, i will want our discussion to be sequential, so as not to lose focus of its essence.
ON BIBLE LANGUAGE USAGE ON TONGUES
By usage of tongues, i will how tongue(s) was described, the word usage to explain and qualify the tongue.
It is not surprising that almost all places where tongues (as per OP) is mentioned or inferred in the bible, it is always qualified: e,g stammering (foreign tongues), Isa 28:11, new tongues (Mark 16:17), another/other tongue (Acts 2:4), kinds of tongues (1 Cor 12:10) etc. Our first investigation is to understand the meaning of those words and why were they used in particular. This can explain first if tongues can is referred to as human language, or another different from such.
How Tongue is Described in the Bible (Verse by Verse Explanation).
I will give you few list then we will discuss them one after another.
1. Stammering and Other Tongues Isa 28:11
2. New Tongues Mark 16:17
3. Other/Another Tongue Acts 2:4
4. Kinds of Tongue 1 Cor 12:10
1. STAMMERING TONGUES Isaiah 28:11
11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. KJV
Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people NIV
The word STAMMERING/FOREIGN
The word stammering was translated from the Hebrew word lâ‛êg. It is simply translated as mocking, a mocker, a buffoon. It was used only 2 times in the OT (Isa 28:11, Ps 36:16)
16 With hypocritical mockers in feasts, they gnashed upon me with their teeth. Note the word: hypocritical mockers.
Like the ungodly they maliciously mocked; they gnashed their teeth at me. NIV
Hence, in Isa 28:11, Stammering lips implies a mocking lips.
To better see this, the Hebrew word lâ‛êg was taken from a root word lâ‛ag. Let us see how this is used.
lâ‛ag: to deride; to speak unintelligibly, have in derision, to stammer. Used 18 times in OT, It is used in discussing unintelligent speaking or speech.
2 Kings 19:21
21 This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning him; The virgin the daughter of Zion hath despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn; the daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee.
To make a jest, to mock, to like when you try to mock someone by speaking blablabla, unintelligent to deride him.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
That is he will mock them. When this is used in speaking, it will refer to muttering unintelligibly, to deride or mock a person, speaker or an action.
lâ‛ag also have a closer word: la‛ag (note the marks on them), used just 7 times, to mean the same: mocking, derision, stammering.
Anytime any of these are used: lâ‛êg, lâ‛ag, la‛ag, it always point to these facts:
1. It is a speaking that mocks, when you mock in speaking, you will likely have to speak in a mockery form not in a true form of language.
2. It is always unintelligible. That is, the speaking is strange and lack understanding. The reason it is used as foreign (NIV). Because it will sound foreign and not known.
3. When you mock in speech, that is making derision of something or someone, you will usually do that in funny way, especially in gibberish.
Furthermore, In modern day language, the best word that describe what we do when we mock someone, is the word "gibberish".
Gibberish means talking that sounds or looks like real words or authentic speech, but it really has no meaning at all. This is what we do when we mock someone or want to make jest of a man.
So, Isaiah 28:11 usage of stammering lâ‛êg is very key in interpreting what tongue is truly is.
We can consider other verses later after we handle this (Isa 28:11).
I have given Part 2 (Mark 16:17, New Tongue) in below link.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 9:48pm On May 15|
These lengthy writeups only serve to confuse, not educate anyone. JEEEZZ!
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 10:05pm On May 15|
I think you may need to review the contents of Isaiah 28 vs 9 through 13 again, maybe this time in plain English
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 10:29pm On May 15|
Yet, "How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?"
It is through the foolishness of preaching, God speaks to the heart. Don’t you know that the Law of God written in the hearts as Jeremiah puts it is incubated in the ears?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:34pm On May 15|
MuttleyLaff:cc: Acehart, Kobojunkie, hupernikao,
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 10:43pm On May 15|
Are we not ignoring the obvious message in that there? God Himself will make it happen. That is one of the key messages of the new Covenant announced in the book of Isaiah & Jeremiah. He is God all by Himself and is quite capable of reaching each and everyone in His time.
No it is not through your preaching at all. Read that verse again. God Himself announced that no longer will a neighbor have to tell another about Him. I say I trust God to do His work, His way.
The Christian religion today is a result of the practice of preaching by men that you speak of -- the preachings and incubation all handled by men. What results? Glossolalia and all the other anti-christ beliefs that are the Christian religion of today, all continually sold in the name of Christ.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by vickydankal(f): 11:15pm On May 15|
I have iPad for office, techno tablet for working at home and 2 iPhones for personal use. It is not the phone I think it is my eye. Working long hours with the computer and small screens is the issue.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hupernikao: 11:45pm On May 15|
The scriptures original languages are Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek. English are translations or better still interpretations, and in doing translation, a lot can be lost on us in language. This is also common today when you want to translate your local language to English.
Hence when we dont have clear explanation of a word usage, we must result to the original context to get our meaning. The essence why you can overlook the Hebrew writing in this case. There is no English word that will better describe a word in a language than that same language.
Therefore, we must look at what was translated as "strange talk" in your translation from the original word "laeg". That is the meaning i gave you above. If the original writer used "laeg", what we must seek to know is the meaning of the word as used in that period and in bible context.
That is exactly what i gave you. It simply translate to mockery, unintelligible speaking. We must thus derive our meaning from this.
Note and observe even your translation usage of words:
verse 10: He speaks to us as though we were babies? babies? how do you converse with a baby? blabbing or intelligent speaking?
verse 13: So the Lord’s words will be senseless sounds. Senseless sound? how do you describe such sound, unintelligent, right?
But i will keep my focus on the original word as that is what can bail us out. Laeg is used only twice, its derivations were likewise used to mean the same. No place again in the bible was the work laeg, laag etc was translated as what you did. Kindly study the word as used by the original writer, that is the focus here.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hupernikao: 11:51pm On May 15|
Kindly lets pay attention to the bible explanation sir.
I have examined the very first place we have tongues inferred (see below link). Kindly look at the verse and give your input considering the original writers view and usage of words. Then we can move to others.
My earlier submission below. Let us do a verse by verse analysis of tongues explanation in the scriptures. We cant derive out conclusion outside this.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 11:57pm On May 15|
hupernikao:Sure, a lot can be lost but also, given that Isaiah was written more than 3000 years ago, it could simply be a problem of understanding as well.
Isaiah was written in Hebrew, but for those who have a problem understanding the original hebrew, it is good to consult an English translation that makes the meaning more plain for them. Which is why, it is also ok to read the simple English translations.
hupernikao:Sure. So is the English translation off then? Or can we get on with the conversion without needing to pull out our concordance for each word??
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hupernikao: 12:05am On May 16|
You can never, and i mean never rate a foreign language, or translation above the original writings of a language. English will/has failed may test in language interpretation same as our local languages. No matter how primitive a language is, its translation must always derived meaning from it. There are lots that will be lost if you stay on translation. I give you a test. If you are African, in English, we have discussion and communication as two different words and meaning, but most African language dont have a difference in this. You may likely not be able to differentiate between communication and discussion in your language. So, the importance of always referring to originals.
Sure. So is the English translation off then? Or can we get on with the conversion without needing to pull out our concordance for each word??
We are doing bible study, your concordance will perfectly fit into this. Kindly refer to it well in this discussions.
Check my explanation and cross check usage with concordance, then we can progress. That is how we can derive our meaning based on the authors intent.
|Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health |
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket
Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2020 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 479