Myer: You misunderstand. I was referring to him specifically.
While everyone else on this thread believes in spiritual gifts, his organisation doesn't, and with scriptural reference too. Hence the contradiction.
Although, there's a contradiction in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthans 14 about whether tongues are known or unknown right?
It takes being open minded to see the contradictions. I used to not want to see them too.
I’m sorry about my response then. Now concerning the man behind the name 69, I think your approach to him is misplaced; do you know why? Do you remember when Jesus spoke to the woman at the well, He dealt only with her sin? when she saw that she was being ripped apart, she wanted to turn the discussion away from her personal life and let it become a church vs church talk - “Our fathers worshiped on this mountain; and you say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship." That is what you and Muttleylaff are doing; you are playing on his turf. It would be acrimonious conversation in the end...so you have to take him to your turf.
Myer: Lol I call it as it is. I'm not bound by any religious creed not to be able to speak the truth.
It's you who sees the obvious contradictions in the bible and even in your organisation but you dare not speak. Otherwise you'll be castigated.
JW as an organisation is a byproduct of the extreme effect of the contradiction of the bible.
Example of which is this thread, while every one else believes in spiritual gifts, your leaders managed to impose their misinterpretation on you that 1 Corinthians 13:8 means spiritual gifts have ceased. Does that not contradict the very essence of spiritual gifts in the bible? Mark 16:17-18
Does this thread or writeup rather contradict spiritual gifts? Spiritual gifts wasn’t the focus of the writeup. The focus was the type of “tongues” practiced in the Corinthian church as it is done in many churches today. Did Augustine, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon, D.L. Moody, William Booth, Charles Wesley, John Wesley, speak in “tongues” as it is done today in Pentecostal Churches, C&S, and CCC? The writing was to serve as a stumbling block and if you stumbled, the Lord knows why.
MuttleyLaff: Good morning brother, the early bird catches the worm. We thank Abba for the gift of sleep
Before deciding if to create a topic for the exegesis of 1 Corinthians 14, please rate the gift of speaking in tongues on a scale of 0-9
On a scale of 0-9, what score mark, would you give the gift of speaking in tongues, with 9 being the highest possible score of 9/9, 1 being the lowest score of 1/9 and 0/9 means its no value. If you want to rate the gift of prophecy too.
If I rate it 0, that means I shouldn’t write? 9 means go ahead?
MuttleyLaff: Nobody asked you for all this "waasi."
"Nigbati asiko ba de, a ma pe yin sir, asiko o ti ya, ko iti kan asiko waasi. Ẹ se sir" loosely translated means "When the time is right, we'll beckon you for it, but this isn't a prompt for you, to bring your sermon on. Thank you sir"
Good morning...you were up early.Hope you had a good night’s rest? Should I create a topic for the exegesis of 1 Corinthians 14?
1. It is clear from scriptures that what was spoken in Acts was understood by the people that gathered. Hence, we cannot argue on that as we all agreed.
2. So I came to 1 Corinthians 14 with open mind to investigate and practically apply this misunderstanding of the word "unknown"
3. Because I'm from Lagos state, Badagry so I decided to apply the tongue language of badagry man, "Egun"
4. Because the word "unknown" wasn't in originally translation, I simply read it out everywhere it occurred in 1 Corinthians 14 and everywhere I read "tongue or tongues" in KJV I replace with "language or languages"
5. Since the word "unknown" was added by translations for better understanding, I asked myself, what language or languages is unknown anyway? So I quickly brought my "Egun" language in as practical step......
Is you following me slowly.... ....Btw, that's loosed African American English called ebonics just like we have pidgin or broken English in Nigeria.
6. I STOP and pondered on this word "unknown" and decided to do some imagery in the setting of 1 Corinthians 14, that is, I brought in imagination of worshippers with different languages. So here we go....
So I'm the preacher....so I'm the preacher with egun language and in the audience are French, English, Spanish and Yoruba ( let's limit to those four). Now, remember I STOPPED to practically investigate the word "unknown" assuming I want to use this word while I read through 1 Corinthians 14. So, definitely "egun" language is KNOWN to me as the preacher but UNKNOWN to the listeners. Hence, that word "unknown" is not some sort of language(s) that's from nowhere adding the fact that it was added by translations. SO THAT WORD "UNKNOWN" doesn't apply to ME as the preacher BUT to the listener. In this practical case, egun is UNKNOWN to the listeners.
7. So I started reading slowly, inserting my practical languages and at the same time questioning the texts of Apostle Paul. So here we go: I re read the whole of 1 Corinthians 14 with that concept and it makes much clearer.
PART 2.
I did the SAME thing in the steps above BUT IN THIS CASE PART 2, Instead of using my Egun language, I decided to use the commonly taught and believed speaking in tongues taught us in churches in a practical manner but alas, I was caught in several verses of 1 Corinthians 14. How? So in this scenario my language is NOT egun but "unknown" as in UNKNOWN to me and the listeners....like, this below:
Again I STOPPED and asked myself....why will I even speak in such WHEN EVEN ME NOR THE LISTENER DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THIS SO CALLED "unknown"? But I continued anyway to see my final outcome....
So, I used this option to practically interpret 1 Corinthians 14 to the end, i came to conclusions this OPTION 2 DOES NOT LINE UP WITH MANY VERSES OF 1 CORINTHIANS 14, verses such as.....verses 2 to 6, 13 - 14, 23 - 36.
You can practically do this PART 2 applying those verses and see how those verse starring at you in the face with the outcome....or better still, practically apply PART 1 using your language of choice to interpret the whole 1 Corinthians 14.
I hope we go back to RE-learn or unlearn somethings taught to us in the church while we're new born babes in the Lord.
Would you like me to ask the question you know I would ask?
Finallydead: Acehart, please answer my two questions. And while you're at it, try to explain why the speaker's mind is unfruitful while his spirit is speaking(1Cor14:14). I'm guessing you think that in John's revelation, the angels he heard at the throne all spoke in native hebrew, right? But when english-speaking people today hear them, they suddenly switch to English, huh, Acey? Try to think about that.
I have answered this question before.
1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
May I list all the spiritual gifts; they are:
1. Word of wisdom. 2. Word of knowledge. 3. Faith. 4. Gifts of healings. 5. Miracles. 6. Prophecy. 7. Distinguishing between spirits. 8. Tongues.
All these work together as 1 Corinthians 12:12-15 says, right? Not one of them is head knowledge or learned. Would I be right to say, ‘if I pray in tongues, miracles would occur?’ When miracles occurred, was my mind fruitful or did my mind understand how it came to be? Surely, I may not understand that what Paul meant by “my spirit” was indeed “my spiritual gift”; but if I prophesied (Interpret), and unknowingly I started speaking in the native tongue, was my mind fruitful or perceive that I spoke in the native tongue? Therefore, whatever gift I manifest, whether gift of healings or word of wisdom, my mind is unfruitful because the mind works with memory and pattern of thought, and these gifts don’t need these activation nerves in my brain to bring them forth. However, whatever prayer or speech one makes and an Amen should be elicited, it must be done in intelligible language even if I need to heal to the man bound in an infirmity for 38 years.
Revelation 7:9-10:
After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; and they cry out with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb."
Concerning John and his revelation, Revelation 7 would put into perspective what this spectator heard. The psalmist said: “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge” What language of the heavens and the sky did David learn? Definitely not Hebrew, but his “step-down transformer“ delivered the message to him in the language (voice) of his mind - Hebrew. John heard all the tribes and tongues of the earth say in unison, “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb“. How did he understand Jukun tongue? How did he understand Calabari? He wouldn’t have understood if there wasn’t a translator or in the spirit, all languages are the same (no difference between angelic tongues and human languages). If there was a translator, it would be one who would translate in the language of his mind; and he had to switch on his step-down transformer so that he could translate to the tongues of the seven churches.
So also tongues is the speaking of your spirit in its own native divine language while translation of tongues and prophecy is going further than that to speak God's divine words, not in the spirit's native divine language but like we would hear angels, in our human language for others' sake, in the spirit of true love. All these are a win for your spirit over the flesh.
I was then hoping Acehart would answer it when he also quoted me but well, he got stuck trying to pick whose soprano is better between MC and Satan, lol.
.
Hmmm. Life is complex o. How Paul changed from a natural born killer to a preacher is the eight wonder of world. What we know today and stand for, is changed in a thinking of an eye the next day; so rigidity isn’t a condition in “multiple degrees of freedom” problems.
Anyway, you said: “So also tongues is the speaking of your spirit in its own native divine language“. I want to imagine that the witch at Endor didn’t play a fast one on King Saul; what language did disembodied Samuel speak in again? I heard someone next door shout, “TONGUES!”
“If“ condition: Few hours ago, I tried to show that “angelic tongues” or “tongues of angels” was a mode (method) of prayer, praise and thanksgiving in Books that detailed how angels did their things in heaven and how many Jews craved for this model of prayers in the quest to communicate with God. (Today, we have many prayer books (Say-after-me books) that many people cherish above the scriptures, books that give orders to angels and nature, and also binds demons).
In my cricket exposition, I stated that as long as the object of discussion is “unknown” whether in known or unknown tongues, it doesn’t profit anyone apart from the person speaking. This was Paul’s emphasis of the non-evangelistic tongue practiced in c12:1-3 in contrast to the one that aid the ministers in the propagation of the gospel (c12:10-30). These angelic tongues books were in essence Say-after-me books; so as the angels spoke, this church wanted to do the same. Of course the books were written in human language. So, as against interpretation or prophecy concerning the mysteries of Christ, this church were interested in “non-scriptural prayers” alone. (Don’t we see that in many churches today?)
Paul’s main objective was this: “For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified”. If the gift of tongues, whether angelic tongue or earthly tongue, doesn’t minister Christ’s atonement to both the saved and the unsaved, it should cease.
MuttleyLaff: Let's jazz up the conversation a little with Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9
Acts 22:9 And those who were with me saw the light, to be sure, but did not understand the voice of the One who was speaking to me.
Acts 9:7 The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
These are what I observed:
1. Paul and his escorts heard the voice. 2. Only Paul understood the voice. 3. Paul conversed with the One with the voice in a language Paul understood.
Points 1 and 2, would be the points you would want us to speak about. Firstly, Paul and his escorts were not saved men. Secondly, Paul’s understanding only came as a privilege so that he would not say, ‘my righteousness bought the privilege’. This privilege to let one in and cast the others out is a mystery. It seems to me that the escorts heard the language of the voice but didn’t understand the message; I say this because the same destination the voice ordered Paul to go to, is the same destination the escorts led Paul to without hesitation.
1 Corinthians 1:18: For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
I have quoted this verse because the misunderstanding of the escorts may not have arisen because the speech of the One with the voice was rendered in a foreign tongue but because the message didn’t sound reasonable to them. The only part they could fathom was the part when Paul spoke and the voice said, “Get up and go on into Damascus, and there you will be told of all that has been appointed for you to do.” I’m almost sure that the privilege of understanding came to them when instruction was given to Paul in plain language - which they also heard.
Myer: These are questions we can only speculate to. We were not told the demographic of those who believed but it is understandable that a sizeable number would be both the Jews and the Gentiles.
2. Tongues as a sign to unbelievers is meant to be in the language they understand, otherwise it makes no sense to them and they call it madness. Both 1 Corinthians 14 and Acts 2 corroborate this.
Good morning. Trust you had a nice rest. Your summary is perfect.
MuttleyLaff: Judah and Jedidiah weren't ever MVPs to me. Its the meaning of the two names that I am drawn to, not that they are MVPs.
Do you know that the main character in the story about Joseph and his brothers was Judah. If those events were made into a movie, the title would be “Redemption”. Only a trained eye would see that Joseph wasn’t the main character.
Goshen360: It looks like we might have to slow down and ask ourselves some questions in order to learn or unlearn....depending what angle we're looking at.
So the question I was asking myself is, what's exactly is this unknown tongues or language of angel.
2. What or why do I need to speak language of Angels for if I'm not praying or speaking to Angels?
3. I think there's a misconception or misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the word "unknown" in 1 cor 14v2.
4. I think MuttleyLaff explained it and I also did some extraction and insertion into the whole of 1 cor 14 and its clearer to me now....
5. I did my study insertion AND ALSO extract that word "unknown" and asked questions while studying and that made the whole 1 cor 14 clearer...You might want to do same.
Cc: hoopernikao
Please tell us about your study na. If you used to speak in tongues before the study, did your study solidify your belief in glossolalia or it made you do a 180 degrees turn away from it?
MuttleyLaff: The reason why apocrypha and pseudepigrapha books, like BoE, Jubilees, BoJ, Book of A&E, Book of Noah etcetera never and didnt make it into the 66 canon was because they were fake news. In fact, these first century, soon after Jesus' death, books started being authored and never were God inspired. The Book of Enoch,which there are three versions of it, is a perfected work and good art, of reverse engineering. The Book of Jasher, lmao, the other half of the BoE, twins spawn of Satan, that's paraded about, is not the original one mentioned in the Bible, in verses like Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18. The original BoJ (i.e. the Book of Jasher) is lost, missing AWOL. The paraded one, is a hoax, it along with the other apocrypha and pseudepigrapha books, are inflated works of the imagination. They are literary works of fantasy with not likely to be true or to have happened improbable things. It is because the books are not in fact, what they write to be, is why they aren't in the 66 books that make up the Protestant Bible. There are no authenticities, in any of the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha books.
Now, I expect some heavyweight person, like you to read the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha books, but have the good sense of able to separate the wheat from the chaff, when reading them books and not as some gullible person normally wouldn't do but rather be taken in by the books, hook, line, sinker and all.
It is true Apostle Peter, and even Jude too sef, referred to the Book of Enoch. They both did when drawing attention to false teachings and slanders permeating the body of the early believers, from the developing craze then of reading those apocrypha and pseudepigrapha books.
Apostle Peter, in his letter, first warned, then Jude in his letter, wrote saying what Apostle Peter earlier wrote about and warned against, has just happened.
Fyi Acehart, celestial beings aka extra-terrestrial aka angelic hosts of heaven are incorporeal beings. They are not composed of matter, they have no physical or material existence, so don't have physical tongues.
Let me ask you a question(s) Acehart, when God communicates with you, what language does He use? In what tongue does God communicate with you?
Of course you know my answer. Even in my dreams, God communicates with me in symbols I understand and tongues I understand.
I spoke of the angelic tongues because the Jews were really religious people and anything to make them stand out religiously, they’ll hip hop into it. The writer of Hebrews wrote extensively to them that Christ isn’t an angel. So you see how they held angels in high esteem. If it comes to angels, anything and everything will suffice.
Permit me to mention hoopernikao. This is how to read the meaning of scripture (exegesis) and not read your own meaning into scriptures.(eisegesis)
I’d like to speak about the “tongues of angels”. I had written that the synagogue in Corinth essentially read the Tanakh - the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Writings. These Hebrew texts weren’t written in Gentiles languages; they were exclusively written in Jewish tongues. Some of the books didn’t make it to our Bible but we see someone like Peter referring to the Book of Enoch, one of the apocrypha.
Just for information: Angelic tongues referred to sung praise in Second Temple period Jewish books. Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice is the principal source for angelic tongues. The Songs describe worship around the throne of God in the heavenly realms. Reference is made to angelic tongues. Throughout the thirteen songs there is everything ranging from accounts of how the angels lead their prayer service in the temple on high to detailed descriptions of the inner throne room where the presence of God and the other god-like beings reside.
In 1 Corinthians 14:7, Paul speaks of a “stringed” instrument - the harp. In one of the sources of angelic tongues hymn books, The pseudepigraphical Testament of Job, Job gives one of his daughters a stringed instrument. In verse 15, he speaks of “singing with the spirit, and singing with the mind”; and giving thanks in verse 17. (Psalms of singing and thanksgiving tongues are sections of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice)
If there was a deep yearning by the Gentiles to display the “spiritual gift“ of knowing the angelic tongue or the Hebrew tongue illustration of how Angels speak rather, would not the meaning verse 1 Corinthians 14:23 be clearer as all the citizens of Corinth who were members in the church at Corinth all speak in Jewish tongue and a fellow citizen (an unbeliever) enters the assembly and see such a manifestation and declare his fellow citizens mad?
Myer: Here in lies the dilemma in 1 Corinthian 14. Did Paul distinguish between known and unknown tongues? Clearly he does not forbid speaking in tongues. But rather that it should be moderated.
1 Cor 14:2 seems to be referring to unknown tongues. Which no human can understand except interpreted by one with the gift of interpretation.
This obviously contrasts with Acts 2:6 where unbelievers could understand the tongues without the need for gift of interpretation.
Hence it seems Paul concludes that speaking in tongues for personal edification should not be a public affair but a private affair. Except there is an interpreter.
While speaking in tongues for evangelism should be towards unbelievers in their own language. Hence why it is indeed a sign. Something they would have no choice but to accept as being supernatural. Whether they end up believing or not.
Yet, you feign ignorance of our bone of contention as you continue to evade providing answer to a question I have repeated in every post on this topic.
Have you personally spoken in another tongue (lamguage) as a sign to an unbeliever?
I agree with you with regards to the bolden. What Paul was differentiating in the tongues of Chapter 12:1-3, and that of chapter 12:10 is the former was not a tool for proclaiming Christ’s gospel; the latter was a tool for the ministers to declare the gospel.
I’d like to ask this:
1. Are the unbelievers in Chapter 14 the Jews who were in the synagogues in Gentile territories (as the book of Acts show that those who weren’t open to believing the gospel were the Jews)?
2. If Paul had in mind the unbelieving Gentiles, what sort of tongues would the believing Gentiles manifest for the perplexity of the unbelieving Gentiles?
MuttleyLaff: You still haven't told me why Lara is your first choice, or is it because he, black, lmao. The race card
Please don't do this to me. Its not fair, nah, it won't be fair on the other giants in the corridor of the faith hall of fame. I'll tell you what I'll do, I'll say have in the past used Judah and Jedidah as reference, mainly because of the meaning of the names, nothing more than that.
MuttleyLaff: "1Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the disciples of the Lord. He approached the high priest 2and requested letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any men or women belonging to the Way, he could bring them as prisoners to Jerusalem. 3As Saul drew near to Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?” 5“Who are You, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” He replied. 6“Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” 7The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless. They heard the voice but did not see anyone" - Acts 9:1-7
"1Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. 2(And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,) 3I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. 4And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. 5As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished. 6And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. 7And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 8And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. 9And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of Him that spake to me." - Acts 22:1-9
Let's jazz up the conversation a little with Acts 22:7 and Acts 22:9
Okay. Give me a few hours. I’ll just read now and meditate on it.
pressplay411: That is just an opinion, which is contradicted by other opinions in the commentary. He claimed Angels made inaudible sounds, how then do we explain angels sing Holy Holy in heaven? How them does Angel Gabriel deliver good tidings?
Another opinion in the commentary below contradicts that position and seems more plausible as it agrees with other scriptures.
i. In Paul’s day, many Jews believed angels had their own language, and by the Spirit, one could speak it. The reference to tongues of… angels shows that though the genuine gift of tongues is a legitimate language, it may not be a “living” human language, or may not be a human language at all. Apparently, there are angelic languages men can speak by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Hi, I just want to take a cue from Habakkuk 2:20 to say a contradiction may not exist.
"But the Lord is in His holy temple. Let all the earth be silent before Him." (Habakkuk 2:20)
In the vision of Isaiah (when he saw the Lord enter into the heavenly temple), he saw the seraphims cover their faces and feet. One writer wrote: They covered their faces because they didn’t find themselves worthy to gaze upon the glory of God; they covered their feet because they didn’t find themselves worthy to stand before the presence of God. In covering their faces, they covered their mouths with their massive wings that even spoken words would be inaudible. If as we pray: thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven, then as Habakkuk speaks of silence of the whole earth as the Lord enters His temple, so it is in heaven, right? Then how did the seraphims cry, Holy, Holy, Holy! until the frames of the door posts trembled? We may not know all about the power of angels but we know that they were purpose-built for their heavenly environment; didn’t Jesus say that they have no need for procreation?
We know they spoke to men in uncovered faces. Men understood them when understanding was made in man’s language. We see that when the voice from heaven said: “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again”, some people said it thundered while some said an angel spoke. In what language did the “angel” utter those words?
Vanderandrew: My Favourite Nigerian preachers in Nigeria and outside Nigeria, I always love to hear are in no particular order
1) Bishop David Oyedepo 2) Pastor Paul Enenche 3) Pastor Chris Oyakhilome 4) Bishop (Dr) Francis Wale Oke 5) Pastor Joshua Selman 6) Dr Abel Damina 7) Pastor Olubi Johnson Rev George Adegboye 9) Pastor Poju Oyemade 10) Pastor Bolaji Idowu 11) Rev Tokunboh Adejuwon 12) Rev Chris Delvan 13) Pastor Tunde Bakare 14) Pastor Ezekiel Atang 15) Bishop Isaac Idahosa 16) Pastor Sam Adeyemi 17) Pastor David Ibiyome 18) Pastor Paul Adefarasin 19) Dr Anselm Madubuko 20) Pastor Matthew Ashimolowo 21) Pastor Jeff Iyonawan 22) Pastor Sunday Ogidigbo 23) Rev David Ben Enoch 24) Pastor Kingsley Okonkwo 25) Rev Gbeminiyi Eboda 26) Rev (Mrs) Funke Adejumo 27) Rev (Dr) Ojei Ohiwere 28) Pastor Yomi Kasali 29) Rev David Ogbueli 30) Pastor Alex Adegboye 31) Rev Olusola Areogun 32) Apostle Victor James 33) Bro Gbile Akanni 34) Pastor Charles Osazuwa 35) Rev Andy Osakwe 36) Dr Uduak Udofia 37) Pastor Sola Osunmakinde 38) Barr Emeka Nwampka 39) Rev Good-heart Ekweme 40) Rev Chris Okotie 41) Rev (Dr) Tunde Joda 42) Apostle Johnson Suleman 43) Rev Joshua Iginla 44) Pastor (Mrs) Dotun Arifalo 45) Rev (Prof) Mossy Madugba 46) Pastor Tony Rapu 47) Rev (Prof) G.E. Erhabor 48) Rev Felix Adejumo 49) Pastor Itua Ighodalo 50) Rev Yinka Yusuf 51) Rev Yemi Davids 52) Rev Joe Olaiya 53) Rev Ntia Ntia 54) Rev Ben Eragbai 55) Pastor Samuel Osaghae 56) Pastor Samson Jedafe 57) Pastor Sunday Adelaja 58) Rev Bankole Akinmola 59) Pastor Iyang Okutiyang 60) Evang (Mrs) Margaret Agbonifo 61) Rev Sunday Popoola 62) Prophet Isa El Buba
You recycled this message again. Maybe your didn’t like the previous feedback you got. OP, can you mention 62 teachings Jesus gave his disciples?
Finallydead: 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.
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?
Bodydialect57: And what happens to the " bring ye all tithes in the first line of Malachi 3:10?
You would have to read the Book of Ezra and Nehemiah to see that the giving of tithes and other customs were jettisoned by the exiles after their return. (Malachi lived during this period). This apathy for the things of God lasted for centuries. However, the next time tithes was mentioned again in the scriptures, Christ had come.
Tithes comprised of wheat and barley - their flour are used to make bread. Christ is called “The Bread of Heaven”. It would seem that God was saying in Malachi 3:10: if they would bring their bread into the storehouse, He will in return give them His bread.
Finallydead: 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 1Cor 13:1-3 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,
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.
Hi,
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.
Bodydialect57: And that is why the heart must be well guarded with all diligence, devil always lurk around to help actualise conceived damnable thoughts.
Finallydead: 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.
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!
MuttleyLaff: You've got me interested in cricket now. I need to go brush up on the how to record or score point, the game tactics, how to know who is winning and losing et cetera Thanks.
PS: So whats your take on Imran Khan, Ian Botham and Graham Gooch
I didn’t watch them play. If it wasn’t Brian Lara playing or Shane Warne playing, they wasn’t any need to watch cricket for me. I think I watched Imran Khan once or twice but I don’t think he or Pakistan team did impress anything on my mind. I haven’t watched watched a lot of sports for many years now because of locusts and palmer worms. Now I don’t see them anymore, but they have damaged my love for watching TV or sports too.
MuttleyLaff: You still haven't told me why Lara is your first choice, or is it because he, black, lmao. The race card :10)
His Windies team was weak in my opinion. Though I liked the guile of their fast bowler, Curtly Ambrose. Like Ambrose, the rest of the team seemed hotheaded. Beside Lara and Chanderpaul, the rest seemed like that Brady Bunch family. With the Australian team wrecking havoc, Lara always hit the balls effortlessly and with style at every opportunity. Hitting sixes and playing balls into spaces isn’t the easiest of skills; sometimes they are done with desperation; you wouldn’t see that desperation with Brian Lara; he was a gently man.
MuttleyLaff: Wow, interesting. Why Brian Lara then, of course, I like him too, especially for his cool quiet looking demeanour. He seem s short fella, or is that my imagination
I like you choices and even how you threw in Tamar in the mix, to have a female featured, but of the Tamars now is this? I am guessing you aren't talking of Tamar, the daughter of king David
You've hinted a bit why Job is your first. True, Job, no doubt, was dogged. He didn't even for a moment waver in his faith, though he did at points, slip into severe depression but what's with David, why him coming second in your books, then also why Tamar running third, I am intrigued to know the reasons behind your second and third choices. As for me, its a hard one, smh, I am spoilt for choices.
Yes. Brian Lara was short; he was probably the same height as Tendulkar.
Tamar, the daughter-in-law of Judah. She was a help to me when life didn’t make sense, so was Job. They just told me that you can do everything by the books and yet your world will shatter. I guess she like Abraham rejoiced to see my day - as Jesus said. The storm is over now or rather it has reduced from a category seven hurricane to just rain showers.
David, O! David! it was how he handled himself in the years after the loss of his children and kingdom - that baffles me and guides me - He shows me that when God wants to refine you into complete holiness, He doesn’t mind ripping you apart, but you still must trust Him through the process.
Myer: I'm beginning to give up and conclude that you simply like to hear yourself and not listen to reason. You have only ended up twisting the obviously straight forward message of this book.
What was Paul addressing here? Spiritual gifts, with specificity to the gifts of Tongues, Interpretation and Prophecy. I will explain it verse by verse-
1. Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
This verse says it all, The purpose of it all is charity/love. Also spiritual gifts are to be desired, but the purpose is to prophesy. Hence Paul exalts the gift of prophecy. Why? Because it is the only way to understand God's mind towards the church.
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.
Now in this verse Paul explains what tongues achieve, that it is not to be understood but a communication of spiritual mysteries. However this would seem to contrast Acts 2: 6-13 where the gift of tongues was first released to the disciples and understood by the unbelievers who spoke those tongues (languages) This is why some bible scholars believe there are two types of tongues- known and unknown. Paul here was addressing the unknown tongues.
3. But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 4.He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
Paul here addresses the purpose of both gifts of prophecy and tongues. Prophecy is for the benefit of all, while tongues (unknown) is personal.
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.
I believe here Paul settles the matter, Prophecy is greater than speaking in tongues which no one can interpret.
6. Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
Let me paraphrase here- Paul is simply asking, What is the point of speaking in tongues if it can't be interpreted?
7- 11 here Paul goes on to illustrate how speaking in tongues is more or less making noise, without interpretation.
12. Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
Here we can see the purpose of spiritual gifts, is for the edification of the church. To help believers grow.
13-19 In these verses he continues to stress the pointlessness of speaking in tongues if it can't be understood especially in the church gathering.
20. Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
This is self explanatory. Proverbs 4:7
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.
I believe you've done justice to this verse Isaiah 28:11. That even with the signs, an unbeliever (hardened heart) would yet not believe.
22. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
This verse says it all. This is where you seem not to understand the intention of Paul. Even though an unbeliever won't believe, yet speaking in his own (known) tongue is a sign to an unbeliever. Imagine I'm a yoruba man in an igbo land. And someone who is clearly an igbo man with no understanding of yoruba language starts preaching to me in yoruba or gives a revelation to me in yoruba, I would be amazed. That is the intent of the known tongues. That is what the sign is meant for. This once more brings me to my question which yet you continue to evade- Have you preached/evangelized to an unbeliever in another tongue?
23. If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
Clearly this paints the ridiculous image of what is today obtainable in our churches today. Every one speaking in (unknown) tongues, without interpretation. Clearly any one who is not a member of the church would thing you mad. I can relate to this.
24. But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
This is the antithesis of verse 23. If I a visitor to your church were to be prophesied to in a language I understand, and with a revelation I know to be true in a way that is convincing, I would have no excuse but to believe. But if I harden my heart still, then I am judged.
25. And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
The experience of an unbeliever who open his heart to a true prophesy and revelation would produce the reaction of awe and worship as explained here.
26-32 Here we see what is clearly missing in today's churches. I know because I have been privileged by my travels around this country to visit different denominations. Here we see the way the spiritual gifts should operate. Those who speak tongues should be accompanied by those who interpret. And those who prophesy should do so in an organized manner with others who also prophesy. The church should have the various spiritual gifts working together in harmony for the edification of the church.
33. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Churches today make one question this verse because what we see in them is confusion.
34-35 has been interpreted by different scholars. Some say Paul was being traditional, while other maintain it is a spiritual order.
36-38 Paul here confidently affirms that any one who is spiritual would agree with him, otherwise, is spiritually ignorant. (You have to admire his audacity even towards the other apostles).
39-40 The summary of it all- Paul is not speaking against speaking in tongues but that it is only profitable with interpretation. Prophecy remains more beneficial to the church. And most especially, all should be done in moderation.
I hope now you will understand these; -The purpose of it all is Love/Charity. -Speaking in tongues is only profitable when it can be interpreted. Other wise it is just empty noise that profits no one. -Speaking in tongues is a sign to unbelievers- if you who is not from my tribe spoke revelations to me in my native language I would marvel. Whether I believe or not is a matter of the state of my heart. While Prophecy is for believers. -Everything should be done in moderation.
Good morning. I like your exposition. May the Lord guide you and give you peace in Christ’s name.
MuttleyLaff: Yes please, in cricket. Of course, you'll be spoilt for choice, if it was from the Bible, I was asking
Cricket...Brian Lara. Bible...I’ll go for Job; It isn’t easy sitting in front of three guys who think they know God and they spew twisted theology through long speeches so that they can shine in the hopes that the one with the right theology breaks.
Job was awesome. David comes next. Tamar, a distant third.
MuttleyLaff: Thank you. The way you explained it now made sense, as I was able to relate it to what I usually see the players do when watching them on TV et cetera.
So who is your fav G.O.A.T MVP all rounder and why?
Christianity Etc › Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart(op): 11:43am On May 26, 2020
....Btw, that's loosed African American English called ebonics just like we have pidgin or broken English in Nigeria. 
Rev George Adegboye