Acehart:
You could add https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelic_tongues to Sullivan’s link.

"... The writer of the Testament of Job is drawing from the ancient Book of Job and spicing it up with some Hellenistic drama with a mixture of Jewish thought. The person is integrating the ancient rites of the Greek prophetesses going into ecstasy resulting in uttering apocalyptic, prophetic, and supernatural directives spoken in hexamic poetry...."

The wikipedia doesnt highlight the contradictions etcetera in this Dan Brown similar literary work older version

MuttleyLaff:
"... The writer of the Testament of Job is drawing from the ancient Book of Job and spicing it up with some Hellenistic drama with a mixture of Jewish thought. The person is integrating the ancient rites of the Greek prophetesses going into ecstasy resulting in uttering apocalyptic, prophetic, and supernatural directives spoken in hexamic poetry...."

The wikipedia doesnt highlight the contradictions etcetera in this Dan Brown similar literary work older version

Paul stated the bolden in Chapter 12:1-3. He didn’t want to waste his words to express his utter disgust.

Acehart:
Paul stated the bolden in Chapter 12:1-3. He didn’t want to waste his words to express his utter disgust.

You and I know that, but I can say the same about others

MuttleyLaff:
You and I know that, but I can’t say the same about others

The dilemma of knowing the truth. Sometimes, you feel alone.

Acehart:
The dilemma of knowing the truth. Sometimes, you feel alone.

"... uttering apocalyptic, prophetic, and supernatural directives spoken in hexamic poetry ..." means "ògèdè/ọfọ̀" in Yoruba parlance

Goshen360:
Lastly, if unintelligible tongues is not what we hear in Pentecostal churches today which I used to participate too, please you tell us what unintelligible tongues are because to the best of my knowledge that's what Pentecostals called speaking in tongues not the well understood and intelligible languages that was spoken in Acts 2.

This question shows you've either not carefully gone through my posts or you've done so with some opaque lens.
This will have to be my last on this cause I already have explained all this. I only came back here to see hooper's exposition that he was yet to get into.
As long as you try to relate Acts2 with 1Cor14. You'll always get into a big mess.
1Cor14 tongues always needs to work with translation of tongues as a pair.
Acts2 tongues needed no translation because it's different from 1Cor14.
Also, tongues of men will never need anyone to translate because it is spoken in the language of the target audience.
1Cor14 tongues is unintelligible to the human mind (both speaker and listener) hence would require translation. It is however intelligible to spirit beings(God and angels) beginning from your very own spirit.

So 1 cor 13v1 is hyperbolic saying, Even if, he could speak those languages of 2 cor.12v4, but still doesn't have love, he's nothing.

Nope. A dubious assumption that can never work in 1Cor13:1 simply because you need to add the word "even" to change his meaning. And clearly, 1Cor13 already had its context. I touched on this already.

Paul was picking some of the different gifts he had mentioned in 1Cor12, here in 1Cor13:1-3 and showing that without love, these gifts yield no gains.
First, in 1Cor13:1, he picks out "sorts of tongues"(1Cor12:10,28) by breaking it down into its two categories "... tongues of men and of angels...".
N.B:Mutt, you have deliberately added "all the tongues of men...or even of angels..." which makes it a loose generalisation and not a strict categorisation. No, it is strictly "Though I speak with tongues of men AND of angels..."(no "all the" and no "or even" ), making a STRICT categorisation of "sorts of tongues" into two rather than a generalisation.
In 1Cor13:2, he picks out prophecy(1Cor12:10), word of wisdom (mysteries), word of knowledge(1Cor12:8 ) and faith(1Cor12:9)
In 1Cor13:3, he picks out helps(1Cor12:28) and governments (1Cor12:28).
ALL the comparisons he made, from 1Cor13:1-3 were on some of the gifts mentioned in 1Cor12 and their worthlessness without love.
None of these gifts was a hyperbole. His use of "If" wouldn't change that fact. It would only mean if he does these gifts without love, then...
So if you rule out tongues of angels being a type under sorts of tongues and only a mere hyperbole, you can as well rule out every other gift in 1Cor12 mentioned in 1Cor13:1-3 as hyperbole

And btw, what's the usefulness of that so called tongues of angels if not needed here? Are you talking to Angels or to men here? Are you praying to Angels or to God? These are most questions I always ask myself and allow scriptures to answer me through the Spirit

He speaks mysteries(meaning undecipherable to the intellect) IN the spirit(would include other spirits). He edifies himself. He speaks to God.
Every physical exercise edifies your body but not your spirit. Even discussions edify your mind as well as brain.
Likewise every spiritual exercise edifies your spirit but not your mind in this particular(1Cor14:14)

Furthermore, you need to acknowledge that your position can't work with the example of known tongues you gave. As hooper has done enough to show that 1Cor14 referencing Is28 is unintelligible to the hearers(a sign to the unbelievers that they are out of fellowship with Divinity while we are) and Mye.r has shown you that your position will no longer be a manifestation of the Spirit since you have learned the language.
Also, 1Cor14:2 shows that it is mysteries and 1Cor14:14 shows that even the speaker's intellect is left in the dark.
So your position as well as the general balderdash in pentecostal circles won't work.
Notice I have maintained my position from the beginning without moving left or right. And there is no scriptural stance to refute it.

We have to be open minded to re examine our doctrine and there's therefore no shame in it if we're wrong all the way. Be open minded and re examine this doctrine and believe sir.

Exactly, I would say to you. Let's all just leave it here while you do the above and let the Spirit manifest Himself and guide us to Truth.

Finallydead:



He speaks mysteries(meaning undecipherable to the intellect) IN the spirit(would include other spirits). He edifies himself. He speaks to God.
Every physical exercise edifies your body but not your spirit. Even discussions edify your mind as well as brain. Likewise every spiritual exercise edifies your spirit but not your mind in this par

Furthermore, you need to acknowledge that your position can't work with the example of known tongues you gave. As hooper has done enough to show that 1Cor14 referencing Is28 is unintelligible to the hearers(a sign to the unbelievers that they are out of fellowship with Divinity while we are) and Mye.r has shown you that your position will no longer be a manifestation of the Spirit since you have learned the language.
Also, 1Cor14:2 shows that it is mysteries and 1Cor14:14 shows that even the speaker's intellect is left in the dark.
So your position as well as the general balderdash in pentecostal circles won't work.
Notice I have maintained my position from the beginning without moving left or right. And there is no scriptural stance to refute it.

You got me thinking when I read your comment this morning. As I respond, I type in the hope that I’ll be coherent and rather than thinking before responding, I’ll think as I respond.

Paul makes one thing clear: It is better to prophesy (interpret the scriptures) than to speak in an unknown tongue.

I showed in my writeup that the “mysteries” Paul spoke of the second verse of 1 Corinthians 14 is ‘the foretelling of Christ’s life, death and resurrection’ in persons, events, allegory etc. in the Old Testament (Romans 5:14, Col. 2:16-17, Heb.11:19). A few of us including me have said the unknown tongue is a human language; are we correct? I’ll know at the end of my response.

The tension between prophecy and the unknown language here is this: if I do not know that the mysteries spoken of in the scriptures have already been fulfilled, whether I speak or pray in a known tongue or an unknown tongue, my understanding is unfruitful. (v.14).

There are three sets of people Paul makes reference to in this chapter:
1. The gifted one
2. The unlearned.
3. The outsider (the new entrant into the congregation).

When you align all Paul says concerning these three sets of people, all he wants are these: distinctiveness of sound and/or coherency of reasoning (v.7-9) - all must understand what the speaker is saying. So, Paul says: “tongues” are a sign to unbelievers: what are they to believe? How are they to believe? Paul’s mission statement was this: “For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.” The unbelieving were to believe the resurrection of Christ (Chapter 15); They were to believe by preaching through the interpretation of the scriptures and the revealing of the gospel (Romans 10:9-10); Then we should ask this: what language would convey the gospel of Christ’s resurrection to the unbelieving, human tongue or angelic tongue? By human understanding or reasoning, the gospel (whether spoken in angelic or human tongue) is unintelligible (gibberish) because no man has ever died and risen (c15:12-14). Therefore, it is reasonable that the gospel of the risen Christ be made knowledgeable by the working of the gift of tongues, known local dialect and simplicity of expression, to the unbelieving; If I produce a sound with my tongue, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp?