|Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New|
Stats: 2,483,207 members, 5,623,095 topics. Date: Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 09:40 AM
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)
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 1:12pm On May 23|
Bro. where exactly did you see speaking in tongues for evangelism in the scriptures? When you make a claim always add scriptures please. Kindly show that.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Finallydead: 1:18pm On May 23|
Believing is impossible before the eyes(spiritual or at least physical) perceive the object of belief.
Mutt, when you come to a public forum littered with people who have read the Bible as you also have, be careful to present your perspective with modesty. Also, remember we all know only a bit and can learn while we teach.
Assuming you believe Paul wasn't pulling legs when he said "tongues of men and of angels" (1Cor13:1), let me answer you.
1.)Paul 1Cor14:5a,15a. Also everyone who said we should pray in the Spirit
3.)1Cor14:18(both Paul and also they all in the church in Corinth whom he corrected for using it publicly)
4.)1Cor14:4a(personal edification, your spirit expresses itself in its native(heavenly) language, it fellowships with Divinity)
5.)1Cor14:5a,15(pray and sing with his spirit). Praying in the Holy Spirit, meaning whatever manifestation of His in prayer, whether tongues, groans, burdens, substantiated faith etc. was the standard of all the apostles (Jud:20, Eph6:18)
Now Mutt, let me undertake to show how flawed the thought is that the tongues here are human.
First we can all agree that all humans on earth can be broadly categorised into two according to the gospel as also here in 1Cor14- believers and unbeliever
Is this language for the unbeliever?
A Useful Illustration
Consider also this gift according to the 1Cor12:10 pairs with another gift- "translation of tongues" as also 1Cor14:5,15. This is also why we know Paul is not referring to human tongues. You see there's no use interpreting a human tongue which has already reached God's target audience in their learned language as it would already be a prophecy to them just as in Acts2, nobody had to translate. Translation only goes with tongues of angels.
Let me pause here so as to not disturb Mutt and Ace's, cricket match on a tongues thread field since they both believe tongues has reached its best before date. Maybe Goshen360 will come around with more questions to restore both to the purpose of the thread.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Bodydialect57: 2:22pm On May 23|
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 2:23pm On May 23|
The disciples preached to the unbelievers about Christ.
What is evangelism?
Is it no longer preaching the gospel?
Ok, forget I used the word evangelism. Have you preached to any unbeliever in another language?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 2:45pm On May 23|
Nay. Don’t you see what we are doing? We speak about an “unknown” wonderful game in a known tongue but it seems like gibberish to many. Whether we speak about the “unknown” beautiful game in a known or unknown tongue, we would sound gibberish until the “unknown” game becomes “known” especially in known tongues. Oops!
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 6:05pm On May 23|
Did disciples preached with tongues in Acts 2? It is clear now where your misconception is carried from. You are using Acts 2 to interpret 1 Cor 14.
Proper bible study implies that you use teachings, doctrines to interpret events not the other way round. When your doctrine is built on experience and events confusion lies ahead. Epistles are teaching to the church not events. They are primarily instructions to believers.
You are using Acts 2 to interpret Paul, no sir. Doctrine arent established by events, events will be interpreted based on what was taught as doctrine.
Reread Acts 2 again putting Paul's teaching on tongues as a guide. All Acts events on tongues complied with Paul's doctrine. And no where did Paul says any man understood tongues. That mindset us carried from Acts 2. Paul's doctrine never ever mentioned such.
You will only wrestle human tongue into Paul's doctrine based on your bias on Acts 2.
Let me guide you.
Acts is not a book of doctrine or teaching, it is a book of historical events of the early Church, including evolvement and practices. Hence you will see progressive revelations even in the acts of the Apostles themselves.
You can't build a doctrine on any events in Acts except it was taught by Jesus or the Apostles in the epistles.
So, Acts 2 must be read looking at 1 Cor 14 not the other way.
Primarily, Paul never mentioned that tongue is understood by anyone. In fact he rather established that tongues cannot be understood by any man. Please first remove your glasses of Acts and read Paul well.
Also, note Paul always teaches Tongues together with Interpretation and Prophecy, why? They are always in same events. It should be obvious to you that this 3 function together for edification of the hearer.
1. Tongues edifies no second party, either believer or unbeliever, Acts can't be different.
2. Tongue interpreted is prophecy and bring edification to all and all can magnify God. Acts must be read this away and all that are well seen in Acts if you read properly.
There is no basis again doctrinally if you contradict the above.
So, when you have found yourself where Paul is in knowledge, then read Acts with same eye.
Tongues, Interpretation and Prophecy must be seen in all places mentioned in Acts, the reason they were edified in all places mentioned in Acts can't be because of tongue since tongue edifies no one.
You will only confuse yourself to say unbeliever heard tongues in Acts but say you are mad in 1 Cor 14: 22.
Have you also observe Peter's explanation of the events? He never mentioned tongues as explanation, he said prophecy. He pointed to Joel prophecy not tongues.
So, where you must find yourself is to read Paul well and unravel Acts 2 without confusing yourself by taking events above doctrine.
And don't ever say again that gospel was preached in tongue, you are only contradicting yourself or denying Paul. Gospel are in clear words.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 6:14pm On May 23|
Finallydead:In regards to what specifically does the emboldened mean please because I don't follow
Finallydead:"What if I could speak all languages of humans and even of angels?
If I did not love others, I would be nothing more than a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
(i.e. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels,
but have not love, I am only a ringing gong or a clanging cymbal.) "
- 1 Corinthians 13:1
You ought to have quoted that Corinthians 13:1 in its entirety.
Why have you cropped out and leave what's left that suits your preconceived idea, hmm?
Tsk, tsk, tsk, that is naughty, dishonest and insincere. I sure hope you know the implication of those two above emboldened and underlined word in grammar sha. That is talking of do you understand what "What if" and "If I" means, hmm?
Finallydead:Thank you for your generosity in answering the questions. This isn't something that often happens, as questions are either ignored, over looked or half heartedly answered, so much appreciated you answered them. Let me now review your responses
Finallydead:"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, (i.e. note, pray in an angelic tongue) but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified"
- 1 Corinthians 14:5
"So what shall I do?
I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding;
I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding."
- 1 Corinthians 14:15
Smh, just as I thought. Where in the so call 1 Corinthians 14:5a and 1 Corinthians 14:15a is "... pray in an angelic tongue" hmm?
Finallydead:"For example, if I use an unknown language in my prayers, my spirit prays but my mind is useless.
(i.e. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind (i.e. understanding) is unfruitful."
- 1 Corinthians 14:14
Smh, again I ask where in 1 Corinthians 14:14a is there angelic tongue, is about your spirit man itself praying and sanctioned by the Spirit to do so
Finallydead:"I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you"
- 1 Corinthians 14:18
I can't believe you'll have the cheek to produce 1 Corinthians 14:18 as your biblical proof or instance of anyone using angelic tongue/language to pray, smh. Speaking in tongue/language (i.e. speaking in English) has now become praying and no more speaking. Where is angelic tongue in that verse?""
Finallydead:"The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself,
but the one who prophesies builds up the church"
- 1 Corinthians 14:4a
Smh. Totally flabbergasted. It just renders me speechless
Finallydead:"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues,
unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified."
- 1 Corinthians 14:5a
"So what shall I do?
I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding;
I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding."
- 1 Corinthians 14:15
"Pray in the Spirit at all times and on every occasion.
Stay alert and be persistent in your prayers for all believers everywhere"
- Ephesians 6:18
"But you, beloved, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit,"
- Jude 1:20
With the manner you've answered the whole five questions, I've now got to understand the meaning of the tone at the beginning now and why. Smh.
Where in any of those verses, does God or any of the Apostles, sanctioned praying in angelic tongues, as a preferred mode of praying or recommendation?
Finallydead:Please be my guest and on the conditions you tell
1/ Why is it necessary to pray in angels' tongue/language?
2/ Why is praying in my spirit (i.e. not audibly praying, meaning praying silently in the spirit) if not better than, not as good as this your imagined angels' tongue/language?
So? After you've mixed apples with oranges, abi?
First as early as Genesis human according to Israelites customs were categorised as descendants of Abraham and then Gentiles (i.e. Genesis 22:18, "goy" is the Hebrew word for Gentile) same Hebrew "goy" used for heathen, then da da da da da used for unbeliever, as in unbelieving Jew(s), not believing the Messiah and the gospel He proclaims, then after the flood gates were flung open, anyone thats anyone out yet to believe the gospel, as there now is no Jew or Gentile,
Consider also this gift according to the 1 Cor12:10 pairs with another gift- "translation of tongues".As I've said above, you are conflating two things, lmao and you are doing this so to engineer towards your pre-conceived notion of imagined angelic tongues/language
You are combining Acts 2:8, Acts 10:46 and Acts 19:6 which had a best-before date with the no best-before date, no used-by date spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. The former was specifically "neos" "kainos-ed" for the lost sheep of Israel first. Jesus always gave the lost sheep the first serving. The Samaritian lady wanted to jump the queue, He declined saying no that He came for the lost sheep, only to relent and yield to the woman's determination. Jesus, sent the 12 disciples to the lost sheep first, (i.e. Matthew 10:5-15) warning them not to attend to anyone else, saying "... Do not go onto the road of the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans" It was after they returned back from their training expedition amazed of what they achieved that He now thereafter sent out the 70 disciples, saying "... Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves .." to preach to everyone (i.e. Luke 10:1). It has always been the Israelites/Jews first before anyone, before the floodgates were flung open. It is just protocol, nothing else more to it than that, lmao.
Anyway, Jesus upon resurrection, before ascending to heavens. Remember He was killed before the Passover, was in the tomb just before the Sabbath and rose on Sunday after the Sabbath, meanwhile non-Jerusalem Jews have converged into Jerusalem for the Passover festive. Meanwhile, the Passover Lamb has just been sacrificed for the sin of the whole wide word, the Ha Mashiach, aka the Messiah aka Christ, the Yahushua, aka Jesu, aka Saviour has advanced advised the disciples to wait in Jerusalem, so to receive power from on high (i.e. Acts 1:4, and so they did, that on the 50th day, the day of Pentecost, with a loud audible sign, they heard a gust of wind, run sweepingly into the house they were in, fill the whole place up, then people in attendance saw a visible manifestation of a flame of fire shaped in the form of a human being's mouth tongue, forked in shape (i.e. two-pronged) descended on the disciples heads seating there, of which thereafter from this powerful and visible unction, they began to speak in tongues/languages they have never learned before, so much to the surprise of the pilgrim Israelites/Jews in attendance (i.e. Acts 2:4)
Now there was the chance, to have the Gospel proclaimed and announced to the pilgrim Israelites/Jews, and so it was done in their different and individual languages (i.e. Acts 2:7-12). This was best-before date #1 rolling out of the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues/languages.
The second best-before date, happened at Cornelius' place, who happened to be a welcoming and generous Roman Gentile, but who had the fear of God in him. It was Apostle Peter, who had the honours, albeit, he first was dilly dallying, anyway he went there inside and found many people, already there gathered together (i.e. Acts 10:27). To cut a long story short, Peter began as if like a singing canary bird preaching about the Messiah et cetera, soon the power of the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius, his household and other believing Gentiles so much that they tools in Acts 2:4 earlier were speaking in tongues, that the Jewish believers who came with Peter were amazed that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles, too (i.e. Acts 10: 44-46)
Swiftly, to the third and final best-before date spiritual gift of speaking in tongues/languages. Here again cutting to the chase. It was Apostle Paul, involved in this one and it had to do with the yet unbelieving John the Baptist disciples. Please go read Acts 19:1-7 for the full gist. Long story short, after preaching, Apostle Paul laid his hands on them, that the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied too.
So there we have it the two-pronged spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. The cloven or two pronged earlier shape signified a split as in divided in two. Those first three were the first leg or first part of the split, the second leg or second part of the split tongue/language was what's given and/or made available, as a general spiritual gift of the other part of speaking in tongues/languages, as we now have for building the church with
(i.e. Indeed, with
- Isaiah 28:11
"20Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
21It is written in the Law:
“By strange tongues and foreign lips, I will speak to this people,
but even then they will not listen to Me, says the Lord.”
22Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers, but for unbelievers.
Prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers"
- 1 Corinthians 14:20-22
Fast forward to the second leg of the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues symbolised by a cloven/forked/two-pronged human mouth organ tongue unctioning/anointing. We now have Apostle Paul almost grovelling and almost literally on his knees trying to make the Corinthians see sense and spiritually grow up. He then launched into Isaiah 28:11 quoting it but stripping out "stammering lips" or striking out "[i]mocking lips[/I]" because that bit wasn't relevant nor related to his present situation, to say that so it was written in law, that God will have it the people spoke to in tongues/languages that are foreign/unlearned/new/another tongue, but that sadly in spite of that His people will hear but won't listen. After Apostle Paul conceded that, yeah the benefit of speaking in tongues/language is not for the one who already has faith, who believes, but that rather it was for the one without faith, the unbelieving. Prophecy, he concluded, is whats for the one with faith, believers, but not the already lacking faith unbeliever, who does in first place believes
Finallydead:Are you really like this in real life. Smh.
Will you quit showing yourself up in public. Please stop making out as if best-before dates means the gift of speaking in tongues is not/no more available. As I have explained above best-before date speaking in tongues and the one of the nine manifestations of the Holy Spirit, the gift of speaking in tongues is what the two-pronged human being mouth organ tongue symbolised. Phase one has gone, we are with phase two of the unction/anointing.
The problem with most guys on here, is aren't familiar with Jewish custom, idioms, festive et cetera. Most don't even know what Pentecost is. They don't know about the "Feast of Weeks" and/or the "Feast of 50 days" that every Jew is expected to travel down to Jerusalem as pilgrims to come celebrate. People with al sort of foreign language, dialect, accents et cetera. I am sure they don't even know that all Jesus' disciples were from the tribe of Benjamin, hence had a Galilean accent, ring or twang of speaking, that was how Apostle Peter was caught out from his speech when he denied Jesus three times and even swearing just to save his dear old skin, lmao. Now c'mon, lets be real here, there is going to be some real potent effective new improved upon thing going on to make these Galilean village disciples have clout to effectively and efficiently do this business of God for Him
Finallydead:Did you have to end your post with such sarcasm. So Acehart educating me on cricket was that so bad paining you, you had to become irritable. It is a different light of you, I am first seeing and a side of you I never knew. I didn't know you had. Smh.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 6:35pm On May 23|
Acehart:This is beautiful. I stood clapping, giving it a standing ovation. Just so succinct and brilliant.
Maybe we should do angelic tongues next time Acehart, lmao
Could you believe that Juanita Bynum, the other day on Facebook was praying and typing out tongues displayed. She packed it quickly after the backlash and advice that she was taking the piss and pushing the thing too far
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Goshen360(m): 7:06pm On May 23|
Eyin people yi, ( My brother MuttleyLaff; my brother that sounds like Pst Abel Damina, hoopernikao; our dearest Acehart; Finallydead and Myer) ti da ile ru gan ooo....
Anyway, great and excellent job you all have done and so far an insightful discussion and thread, plus it's being peaceful and mature so far aside some side kicks loosed name calling....such as we know sometimes could happen in discussions on this forum.
Most questions in my mind are already answered and I don't know about anyone else that has followed this discussion from beginning. I hope to come up with my contribution in the light of our generation discussion here so far.
It is great fellowship so far!
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 7:08pm On May 23|
Your evasive skill is second only to a shrewd politician.
Just answer the simple question already.
Have you ever spoken in another tongue (which you never knew) for an unbeliever to understand?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 7:31pm On May 23|
Good question. hupernikao is suffering from a chronic eisegesis disorder. He wants to read his meaning into the scriptures rather than reading what the scripture says.
Clearly, there are two types of tongues, some bible scholars have carefully named these Known tongues (lord tongues of men) and Unknown tongues (or tongues of angels).
Apparently from the interaction in Acts 2:6 we can induce that the tongues spoken by disciples here were tongues of men, as various unbelievers from the corners of the world heard each his own language.
This is different from speaking tongues of angels which would require someone also given utterance of interpretation to understand.
Tongues of angels cannot be understood which is why Paul exhorts that it should be done in private except there be an interpreter, lest unbelievers think the person is mad.
A recent example is a woman who survived a car crash and burst into tongues. While believers understood her worship others thought she had gone crazy.
That is simply what Paul is saying. Tongues of angels are private affairs except there is an Interpreter.
But today the case different, the whole church is full of tongue-totting believers yet not one interpreter.
Makes you wonder how come the gift of tongues is in abundance while there's paucity of the gift of interpretation.
What then is the essence of all the mysteries being spoken in tongues if no one understands it?
Or maybe no one understands it because not one of them is actually speaking in tongues but everyone has been taught this charade we nowadays call tongues.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Finallydead: 9:33pm On May 23|
MuttleyLaff:You'll remember it, when it happens again, Mutt.
Okay then, Mutt. If you still can't see 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. Then I'm done here after this because those who want to understand will.
So here goes,
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...".
You said so much while avoiding my clear questions.
Did you have to end your post with such sarcasm. So Acehart...C'mon Mutt. Don't only learn cricket from Ace, lol, learn humor too. I know you have a lot of it deep down inside. Why so serious? (with a joker smile and in Joker's voice). Ace played along with my humor and I thought it was cool, so why didn't you?
Anyways, my bad. Should have ended that statement with "lol" or a smiley.
But don't also expect Ace to laugh with you like you quoted his counter joke now he has begun to see the light about the angel tongues that you deliberately refuse to see, lol.
For some reason, Myer keeps harassing hoopernikao with a question I already answered in my last post and I think my first post here.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:00pm On May 23|
Myer:It is a smh malaise.
Myer:With all due respect, does hyperbole, at all have any meaning you're familiar with?
Myer:"They gathered when they heard the wind.
Each person was startled to recognize his own dialect when the disciples spoke
(i.e. And when that noise occurred, the entire populace gathered and was agitated,
because each one of them heard that they were speaking in their dialects."
- Acts 2:6
The language spoken by the disciples were in dialects of the listing pilgrim Israelites/Jews and likely proselytes too. The Hebrew word used translated as language by some translation bible version is "dialektos" (i.e. speech, conversation, manner of speaking or language)
Myer:Where is the biblical reference for this ludicrous claim
Myer:Our God is not a God of confusion. To what end and/or purpose was this woman going batty like that for
Myer:I am 1000% certain that Apostle Paul never categorically said anything about tongues of angels are private affairs and except there is an Interpreter.
When Angel Gabriel visited Mary, what sort of language were they both conversing in? What tongue? Angelic language or tongue of man?
Myer:It is because its easier to fake the former
Myer:I want you to please recite this prayer:
"Ya Ubangiji, ka taimake ni kar na dogara da fahimta ta amma ka fahimci komai domin ka iya sarrafa maganata, tunanina da ayyukana. Da sunan Yesu, Amin."
1/ Did you recite it?
2/ Did you understand the prayer above you just recited?
3/ If your answer to #2 above is No, then what was the essence of all the mysteries in the prayer you recited above, if you didn't understand it?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 10:16pm On May 23|
Hope your day was spent in the best way you could? Concerning the angel question, Paul had made a similar statement in Galatians 1:8: But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
Paul wasn’t saying an angel would come from heaven to preach another gospel; He was just stressing the form of creatures who have the capacity of speech to the superlative degree; a statement made by conjecture. Paul definitely knows he wouldn’t teach anything contrary yet he brings up the sanctity of the gospel and how it should be protected in the hearts of those in Galatia (against men and creatures). The same tone is used in 1 Corinthians 13:1. In both cases, Paul is using an “if” condition; I mean: “if” is used introduce possible or impossible situations or conditions and their results. The situations or conditions can be real, imagined or uncertain. I could tell a conductor who insults me after his bus driver hits my bike: if I slap you, you go die. I am referring to a possible condition of him dying if I slapped him. Did I slap him? Yes, two dirty slaps, but he didn’t die. That means the result was imagined.
I hope you understand.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:20pm On May 23|
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:25pm On May 23|
Acehart:One word: Hyperbole
Acehart:May God continue to increasingly richly bless you with much more understanding
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 10:36pm On May 23|
You are actually the one avoiding all my questions. I have given you not less than 4 questions you have avoided now.
Kindly pay attention.
What you ask me is not a question because if you are reading my writings well you wont even ask such question. The question is from the result of not reading properly and paying attention.
See it here
Your question: Have you ever spoken in another tongue (which you never knew) for an unbeliever to understand?
I have consistently maintain in all scriptures that tongues werent met to be understood. That Paul's explanation of tongues to anyone is that it is not to be understood. So, asking the above is because you arent paying attention. How do you want me to practice what wasnt documented in the scriptures.
You are the one who hold such view that tongue can be understood by unbeliever, you are the one who explained that tongues was used for preaching, therefore you should be the one answering that. Hope you are satisfied now. Always read before having to ask.
Back to our discussion.
Does Paul's unbeliever understood tongues? Show me that from the scriptures.
Did Paul' tongue (his teaching on tongue) teaches that tongue can be understood by any (unbeliever/believer) without interpretation?
Explain how tongue was used for preaching and saving souls considering Paul's stand on tongues.
I am currently pointing you back to the very scriptures you started from which you think will solve the issue, but alas, you arent ready to stay on it again.
Also in separate post, i have raised you questions so as not to mix thing up. I need your answers to them.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 10:49pm On May 23|
But I read them. Painstakingly if I must add.
You clearly don't want to acknowledge the obvious fact. That there are 2 types of tongues- known and unknown tongues.
You can't explain away the obvious exegesis in Acts 2:6. Tongues spoken here were clearly in various human dialects that were understood by those who heard them. Without the need of an interpreter.
But since you would rather choose your eisegesis, let me change my question then.
Have you ever interpreted anyone speaking in tongues?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 10:54pm On May 23|
Bro, this your exegesis nah wah o. Tongues of angels kwa?
Dont you read bible again? I hope you havent started reading Gretchen and Hansel type of book. You need to calm down and start reading properly.
All you put above are just assumptions. You are only trying to defend what isnt there. Wondering who exactly is reading his own meaning into the scriptures.
So, now, Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 tongues are different? 1 Cor 14 isnt human tongue again as you said?
You must be from the other side serously.
See, how you started.
You mentioned that unbeliever in Paul's doctrine understood tongues. That Paul taught tongues as human language, that is where you started from. And i have challenged that without you having an explanation, now you then turn now that it is angels language. You will soon see Lucife r language.
Apparently, you couldnt defend 1 Cor 14 with your "tongue is human langauge" again. So, firstly accept your error. That is Christiany
I maintain and tell you, that without reading Acts 2 meaning into your explanation, you cannot find anywhere Paul taught tongues as human language. No where. And to start splitting tongue to angel and human is both a lazy approach to Bible study and lack of sincerity to understand Bible language and style .
Tongues in Acts is what Paul explained., no difference. Go and get that down into you. Jesus didnt promise two different tongues. Stop confusing yourself.
I gave you a clue to Paul's' explanation and writing on tongues but you dont pay attention. Paul taught tongues with interpretation and prophecy, Peter explained Acts 2 as prophecy, other places in [b]Acts has prophecies and interpretation. Cant you read it well.[/b]
Well, we will get there. I think 1 Cor 14 is already getting clearer to you since you have opt that it is now ANGELIC TONGUE and not human.
But please read well, again and again, So, that you dont manipulate Paul's teaching.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:59pm On May 23|
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 11:02pm On May 23|
No need to argue whether there are tongues of men and Angels. Read it yourself.
1 Corinthians 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
I am curious to hear your eisegesis on this one.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by orisa37: 11:10pm On May 23|
AS THE LORD DIRECTS.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 11:12pm On May 23|
You consistently ask question without answering my. It is not my exegesis, it is Bible exegesis.
Firstly, you must understand that teaching (epistles) as i have told you must take preeminence on events. You must use teaching to explain events because it is doctrine that brings knowledge and stability. You already have a wrong bias of Acts 2 and that is affecting all your interpretation.
1. Tongues as taught in the bible is ONE. Except we want to start looking at what is not lost. You will need to re-read the only place Paul mentioned "tongues of angels" and read well in context. He wasnt discussing tongues rather.
2. Paul took time to explain tongues in 1 Cor 14, and all his explanation points to the facts that no one can understand it except interpreted. This is what i have passed across in this thread over 100 times. Anyone who says Paul taught tongues as human language carried the bias and wrong interpretation of Acts 2. By Paul's teaching tongues is not human language and it cant be understood by unbeliever or believer.
3. Tongues exegesis was fully taught by Paul side by side with INTERPRETATION AND PROPHECY. I have said this 4 times now. That is the key to unravel your thoughts. Where tongue exist, interpretation and prophecy must be present for others to be blessed. Acts 2, they were blessed, Acts 8 same, Acts 10, same, Acts 19 same. Tongues will bless no man except the speaker. This is a foundational doctrine on tongues you must first accept.. and then read other places in scriptures as such.
4. In Bible interpretation, know that bible has what with called GENRE. That is, the style of writing and type of writing. You must fully understand this to know how to handle each book of the bible. Not all books of the bible are doctrine. We have Genre: Prophecies, Psalms, Epistles, Proverbs etc. The moment you start treating a non doctrinal book as doctrine you will have issues.
I have mentioned to you how book of Acts must be handled. It is an historical record of the early churches, including practices, pattern and events. You will also know that their was progressing knowledge in how they handle things overtime. That must be understood well.
Epistles are doctrines, teachings to you and i, to the church. They are direct instructions to you and i. They give you knowledge. That is where you must established all doctrine. When it is not taught dont go there, when it is stay there. But the challenge you have hard over time is you cant differentiate this so you end up mixing things up.
You must first understand tongues as doctrine (Epistles) before understanding its events in Acts. And you cant ever established in Epistles that tongue is heard by any human. Never. Take this to the bank.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 11:18pm On May 23|
This should be handled differently. I wont look into this to avoid distraction. We have a serious view at hand and must keep that focus.
All i would say for now on this is proper context is key.
And also, by rule of bible interpretation, you cant build a doctrine from a single mention activities that have no corroboration. Such doctrine will fall flat when questioned.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 11:23pm On May 23|
Why will you limit a discussion on tongues to only 1 Corinthians 14? Or to only Paul's teachings?
Like I have already answered you earlier in Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost when the gift of tongues was first recorded in the scriptures, we see clearly that it was indeed a sign to unbelievers as they were each preached to in their various dialects. It is noteworthy that they understood the tongues without the need of an interpreter. Hence it was tongues of men.
Acts 2: 6-13
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
If I must add, some believed and were converted but still there were those who didn't believe.
I do hope this answers all your questions.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Finallydead: 11:28pm On May 23|
My day is blessed, thanks a lot. Wish you grace and peace from the Father as well.
Acehart, you must, if you're willing to, learn to put all scriptures in their context. Only an unskilful workman(2Tim2:15) does otherwise.
You just by comparing 1Cor13 with Gal1:8, discarded the context of 1Cor13. You are now guilty of inserting those seeming insignificant words from Gal1:8 that completely change its idea, like Muttley did that I was correcting.
An emphatic NO. It is not one bit the same tone that Paul uses in both.
And how can we confirm that? Follow the two different stories.
In Gal1:8, Paul used those words Mutt was trying to add to 1Cor13
Gal 1:8 KJV BUT EVEN IF we, OR an angel from heaven...
You see those bolded words there, they make it only an unrealistic example flowing with the context that "...some were perverting the gospel of Christ..."(v7).
That was why I had to make sure Muttleylaff got caught trying to add those.
But 1Cor13 is very different.
1Co 13:1 KJV If(no "but"/no "even" ) I speak with the tongues of men AND (no "or even" ) of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
You see the absence of those words make a huge difference when you put the text in its context from 1Cor 12:31. The "and" also is very important because it shows a strict pairing and joining of the two into the gift called "sorts of tongues".
The even larger context of 1Cor13:1 begins in 1Cor12:1, which is a branch/new string in the entire letter. We can title this segment "Concerning the Spiritual...(1Cor12:1)". So in 1Cor12, he goes on to list out gifts. After all that, he ends the chapter by saying
1Co 12:31 KJV But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet(or plus) shew I unto you a more excellent way(love)
So in 1Cor13:1, he describes a scenario (not an impossible one but a very possible) hence "if" in which the best gifts(from 1Cor12) are used minus love to show that these plus love is the more excellent way.
With all the explanation I did up there about 1Cor13:1-3, you ought to have already seen that Paul is calling REAL gifts already listed in 1Cor12 in 1Cor13:1-3, not some impossible scenarios. Not one of the gifts listed there was an impossible gift. So, if you want to single out tongues of angels as impossible, do it for every other gift listed in v1-3. Mutt, of course, knows better than to cheerlead you for that.
It's plain and simple, if you are humbly and objectively searching for truth and not trying to hold on to a position.
One last thing, on a field of search for truth, try not to be distracted by cheers and hugs. Maintain your focus until you find truth. If you still honestly don't know, I advise you go back to God in prayer.
God bless you.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 11:32pm On May 23|
Does doctrine change the meaning of what was written in the bible?
An account was given of the event that happened in Acts 2 where the promise of the Holy ghost was fulfilled and descended on the disciples. With it the signs followed as the prophecy of Joel came to pass and the spoke with new tongues.
Do you mean because it was not an epistle written by Paul, this book is irrelevant in understanding the gift of tongues?
At this point, I may need to digress and ask you a more important question. Are you a follower of Paul or Jesus Christ? Just checking oh.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 11:38pm On May 23|
Lol I see. Can you pleeeease expatiate on your meaning of context is key?
Paul here highlights the various spiritual gifts and clearly stated distinctly the tongues of men and angels.
If you read further you will see him list the various spiritual gifts while pointing to how Love is above all.
I have of course heard some still explain this away, which is why I was curious to hear yours.
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 11:39pm On May 23|
Finallydead:Finallydead, do everyone a favour and yourself, please pull out your best ever interlinear to paste here 1 Corinthians 13:1, for a word for word peer review
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Myer: 11:45pm On May 23|
I couldn't have said it better.
Permit me to mention hoopernikao.
This is how to read the meaning of scripture (exegesis) and not read your own meaning into scriptures.(eisegesis)
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 11:53pm On May 23|
Please permit me to change the word “tongues” in chapter 12 to the word “Voice”. Also permit me to change the word “angels” in chapter 13 to “Lucifer”; and the word “men” to “Mariah Carey”. I would also like to change the word “speak” to “sing”; and “love” to “humility”. If you permit, I would like to carry on with the paraphrasing of 1 Corinthians 13.1.
If I sing with the voice of Mariah Carey(s) and of Lucifer (since many say he led the heavenly choir), but do not have humility, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
Is it possible that I will sing with the voices of Mariah Carey or Lucifer, the Choir master?
|Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 12:17am On May 24|
|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. 737