ublight:
another cheap point jw folks trying to score.


www.livingwordmedia.org should end this argument.

Visit the website and thank me later

Acehart:


The keyword you wanted to state from Isaiah 28 is unintelligible and babbling. The keyword from your exposition here is: The new tongue is not a tongue of a tribe or a human nation but the people of God. I would like to see your next exposition.

Whatever your next exposition is, remember that signs were for the Jews rather than for Gentiles. “For the Jews require a sign . . . ” (1 Corinthians 1:22). Whenever the gift of tongues was exercised Jews were present, tongues-speaking being used either to communicate the Gospel (as the OP states) or else to confirm to the Jews that the Gentiles were worthy of salvation and should therefore have the Gospel also.

Finally, you said: “It is not a tongue of a tribe or a human nation but the people of God”. This statement is your invention. However, the scriptures says: “You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires;...to be made new in the attitude of your minds; and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.” (Ephesians 4:17,22-24). Your insertion of “tongue of a tribe or human nation” is a dubious and manipulative. It doesn’t agree with Ephesians 4, Leviticus 18 and 19, 1 Peter 4 and every scripture that speaks of how believers must be different from the world.

MuttleyLaff:
"To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits;
to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:"
- 1 Corinthians 12:10

Tbh and if truth be told brother, you actually are on the forefront of those, I sincerely hope will be grabbed, arrested and get convicted through the workings and help of the Holy Spirit about this misunderstood, misused and abused wonderful spiritual gift. It is one, out of the 9 possible different displayed evidences of having the Holy Spirit that could publicly be seen of anyone that's a believer (i.e. 1 Corinthians 12:7-11)

Maximus69:
I never intended chatting you up, my presentation is STRICTLY for those who might pick one or two things from it, but if nobody picks anything then i take my leave.

Maximus69:
You and i have had enough chatting and i'm not interested in arguments Sir!

Maximus69:
So just as you've said you have access to the best teachers, please stick to their teachings and ignore my posts because i only know of one single Christian group globally, and that's where i can get my own iron sharpened as a Christian by fellow believers if the need be!. Hebrew 10:23-25

Thanks Sir!

Maximus69:
SPEAK ability to communicate and the import of that is the cordiality between those SPEAKING the same language!

They should speak with one voice! Zephaniah 3:9

There shouldn't be division amongst them! 1Corinthians 1:10

Everywhere you find them, they have the same line of thought both home and abroad! 2 Corinthians 13:11

So if your FAITH makes you speak "abrakadabra" but it's not fulfilling all the purposes mentioned above, then it's worthless! James 2:18-26

God bless you!

Goshen360:
Again, I pitch my tent and keenly following, learning and enjoying the conversation

MuttleyLaff:
[img]https://s6/images/abracadabra1c36f2bbb8a2b783b.jpg[/img]

The word "abracadabra" is a phrase that crossed into English use, popularised by magicians, who had witnessed rabbis in cause of doing their healing sessions, saying out loud the word "abracadabra", as in like repeating the word, in the form of doing an incantation.

The word "abracadabra" is a Hebrew word and contains the word which is the second word of the Torah "bara" which means to create. The remaining letters of the phrase add up to 26 which could be recognized, as the numerical value for YHVH – The name of God

Now, the thing is, the word "abracadabra" really in Hebrew, means “I will create, as I speak” and the idea behind the rabbis, reciting "abracadabra", as in meaning, saying the "abracadabra" word over and over again or constantly, is because they have this belief and/or idea that they are copying God's style of speech when He was making creation, this being that it is believed that "abracadabra" (i.e. I will create as I speak) is the word that God spoke when He created the world, so in effect, it is believed that, God said, "abracadabra" and creation unfolded and happened.

"And Moses crieth unto Jehovah, saying,
'O God, I pray Thee, give, I pray Thee, healing to her.'"
- Numbers 12:13

So, in Numbers 12:13 above, we see Moses praying for healing, cry out to God about his sister Miriam, saying: "Please heal her, O God, I pray!" Ancient Jews believed that healing comes from invoking the name of God and it is noticed from Numbers 12:13 above that the first thing Moses did, was not say the name of God, but was invoke the name of God. He then, said over and over again, the Hebrew words "Na rapha, Na rapha" to God, as in, over and over, saying "Please heal, please heal" to God, concerning Miriam. Moses literally was chanting "I pray healing, I pray healing" and the rest is history.

Since the word "abracadabra" is not in the Bible, though found in mystical Jewish literature where God is found to say "abracadabra" and thereafter the world was created, wisdom advises against trying to start or be thinking of specifying the word "abracadabra" in and/or during healing exercises. The reason is because, it is the principle here that counts, not the use of word "abracadabra" itself. Whats the principle lmao? Well, it's the style, tool and/or discipline behind it. It's what Moses did in Numbers 12:13, so like how he did, invoke God's name, then insert whatever it is that the prayer is about, backed up with supporting Bible verse(s). For example, you can pray like this: YAH, have mercy please, then repeat with "His mercy endures forever" quoted from 1 Chronicles 16:34, Psalm 106: 1, or Psalm 100:5 etcetera. This when praying, just helps towards aligning the body and soul with the spirit, in getting it focused and concentrated on God. Another example can be: YAH, healing please I pray, then repeat with a bible supporting verse like "By His stripes we are healed" (i.e. Isaiah 53:5) "abracadabra" is not in the Bible, but something like "His mercy endures forever" and "By His stripes we are healed" are in, so these are win, win, situations then.

ublight:
everyone now wants to be a Bible teacher. Smh

ublight:
everyone now wants to be a Bible teacher. Smh

Maximus69:
Thanks for the write-up, but as i've told you earlier "I believe (trust) in only one source of divine guidance (JW)"
That's the one and only group where I look forward to for exchange of encouragement as iron sharpened iron.

Maximus69:
So do well to present your own version or understanding as regards "speaking in tongues" i'm 100% certain that people will learn from whatever you post but definitely not my type!

Thanks Sir!

Acehart:


That’s what Moses prayed for (Numbers 11:29).

MuttleyLaff:
I hardly take a learning opportunity away from another, lmao.

Maximus69:


And Jesus also used an illustration to do the same!

He said "do not stop anyone from preaching or teaching in my name" Luke 9:49-50

But in another illustration he made it clear that a time will come when many will start acting as teachers of Christianity, instead of stopping them they should be allowed to continue, because as times go on their fruit will expose them if they're truly his own or not! Matthew 13:24-30

MuttleyLaff:


(1)I reiterate, my primary source is my Teacher, now please tell Maximus69, who, where and what is the source of this divine guidance JW that you no doubt believe (i.e. trust) in, hmm?

(2)Plonk "MuttleyLaff tongues" into Nairaland search field, to find no less than 8 pages of varied form of write-ups I have posted on the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues

ublight:
everyone now wants to be a Bible teacher. Smh

Maximus69:
Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Count me out!
I only make presentations for interested followers to pick something up and if any does i immediately direct him/her to my brothers and sisters in his neighbourhood who will teach him/her face to face just as Jesus commanded! Matthew 10:3-15, 28:19-20

We don't teach people without showing them how to practically apply it, that's why they must see the way it is done!

Maximus69:
And Jesus also used an illustration to do the same!

He said "do not stop anyone from preaching or teaching in my name" Luke 9:49-50

But in another illustration he made it clear that a time will come when many will start acting as teachers of Christianity, instead of stopping them they should be allowed to continue, because as times go on their fruit will expose them if they're truly his own or not! Matthew 13:24-30

MuttleyLaff:
... Do you always do strawminning like this, huh? Are you in a regular habit of proof texting? Like you just did with 1 Corinthians 4:7 above huh?
Read about your friend Maximus69 boasting below at 9:39am on 03 Apr about his teachers and his so called "wisdom"

"Why not meet my teachers first to know how this divine wisdom is been imparted into the hearts of men like me? undecided"
- by Maximus69 9:39am on 03 Apr 2020

"You need only one Teacher that will guide you into all truths and tell you things nwanne."
- by MuttleyLaff: 11:41am on 03 Apr 2020

MuttleyLaff:
Hmm, there is a high prize to pay being a teacher.
Be careful to teach.
Leave teaching to One that's constituted to teach and show you things

Maximus69:
(1)You need not worried about the source of my own so far you're confident of yours! Luke 20:2

Maximus69:
(2) As i formally said, i'm not interested in your write-up Sir. Once you've made your points interested persons will notice it and pick one or two things from it but definitely not my type!

Maximus69:
Thanks!

MuttleyLaff:
You're worried your source is suspect unlike my MVP Teacher, so the reason why you have to sign post me to Luke 20:2, lmao

Pipul dey cook rice, where you hear say dem tok wan serve you plate chop. Dem neva grind beans finish, akara dey smell. Yahoo ni babalawo. Ole ni everybody. Ẹni ilẹ mọ ba, sa ni barawo - Naira Marley (2019)

Insincerity

Maximus69:
[s]Once my message is clear to the OP, i'm satisfied! :[/s])

Acehart:


Very true. None would have spoken better.

hupernikao:


It seems you actually arent ready to discuss your OP. You seem to be trying to move away from examining your OP and scriptures you used. You will need to follow properly our discussion and make me know exactly where i faulted.

My current concern is to investigate tongues as qualified by the writers of bible firstly because that is where many normally, including your OP waved away in discussing tongues. Whether tongue is for Jews or Gentile is a secondary thing for now, what is primarily is usage of the word. The writers were deliberate in using those words and these are the same words you arent ready to investigate.

You said the below



As i told you, you cant be using any scriptures that come to mind to explain facts. You must present scriptures in context of their explanation. 1 Cor 1:22 is absolutely a different terrain that has no bearing on issue of tongues neither did Paul said the "sign" there is tongue. You are the one who want to draft that in here. And we wont start referring to tongue anywhere we see the word "sign".

Secondly, the church in Corinth can be referred to as a gentile church, with Christian Jews (taught by Paul not Peter o) sir and Paul explained well in 1 Cor 14 what tongue is about. You are the one reading your meaning as above into the scriptures.

You also said



You quoted me wrongly, Bro, but i will manage it. But the facts is you havent shown me how it is my invention. Is tongue new as in new language not human? If no, give me scriptures and tell me why Jesus referred to tongue as kainos.

I am wondering where Ephe 4 contradicts that. Ephe 4 used new man, that is a new creation, Paul called it a man after God, created in holiness and righteousness. That isnt Adamic sir. That is man in Christ, a truly new (kainos) man. That same creature has to past, no record or usage before. This isnt refering to difference from point of man but of God. You are firstly a NEW man CREATED IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, that is why you can live righteously.
This is the same language of new creation and same as that of Jesus as i pointed to you. Pleasssssssssse read all verses i gave you and dont move fast across the response.

---

In all, it still remain that you are giving a distracting response and you arent approaching my submission. Why was tongue called NEW (kainos). Have you checked the usage of that word? Why did Jesus chose such word to explain tongues. This is the focus of this part.

If tongue is called new (kainos) tongue, then it cant be human language. Check by part 2 well i have given you enough scriptures for that else present the reason it is refer to as new (kainos) by Jesus and not strange or foreign tongues.

Jesus called it new, the same way he called his testament new, covenant new etc. This tongue is NEW.[/b] and that new is relative to the fact that it is not human language.

Acehart:


Where would you like me to start? Then, detail the order you would want me to respond.

PharmaGirl:
OP kindly explain Mark 16:17
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

hupernikao:



PART 2: Mark 16:17 New Tongues

For Part 1 check link below
https://www.nairaland.com/5860057/should-speak-tongues-right#89591415

---

Dont forget where we started from, and as i said we will need to examine each places in the scriptures that pointed to tongue.

I mentioned that every where tongue is used it is mostly qualified and this is not accidental, hence we must not over look that in our explanation. Having looked at stammering. I will now consider Jesus' commentary on tongues.

Mark 16:17, JESUS COMMENTARY ON TONGUES
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

It is not surprising that Jesus is the first person in NT to comment about tongues. Let us pay attention to him words. he called it NEW TONGUES.
The word used here for new is translated from the Greek word kainos. I will give you places it was used and what it means.

KAINOS
new, recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn, of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of.

Note that when ever kainos is used it always point to something totally knew with respect to what it qualifies.

Mat 26:28
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins..

New testament. New relative to the testament. It means the testament was never used before, a new kind, unworn, unheard.

Whenever kainos is used it points to something absolutely new. Paul in 2 Cor 5:17 used new creation

17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

New creature, will refer to a creature that is different from the existing creature. That is a new one from what used to be. New creature will not be localized but meaning "this is different from all forms of existing creature".

You can take time to check every other usage of Kainos .

Now to our discussion. Note that there are several word available for Jesus to used if he want to refer to a foreign language, that is an existing one.

The one foreign never occurred in Hebrew/Greek lexicon but its relative exist that is the word "STRANGE". There are 3 words used as strange in NT but Jesus never used any of this to describe tongues.

Strange: allotrios
foreign, strange, not of one's own family, alien, an enemy.

This should be the closest word Jesus would have used if he is referring to a foreign tongue. It means something alien or not part of your tribe.

Acts 7:6
And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years.

Strange land will not mean a new (kainos) land as the land exist before. Strange there will mean unfamiliar.

Strange: xenos
a guest or (vice-versa) entertainer:—host, strange(-r). This is very clear. It is refering to a person.

3Jo 1:5
Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers;

Strange: xenizō
to receive as a guest, to entertain, hospitably

The closest in all these 3 to what Jesus is saying is allotrios, foreign, strange, not of one's own family, alien, an enemy. Buthe never used that. Jesus used a very strong term. kainos.

That means the tongue that has no prior usage, existence or tribe. If Jesus wants to refer to a foreigner's tongue he would use strange (allotrios).

Observe Jesus' use of Kainos in his teachings

Mat 26:29
But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Mar 14:24
And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

new here mean the testament never exist before now.

Mar 16:17
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Jhn 13:34
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Commandment that was never in existence before.

---

Paul Commentary?

2Co 3:6
Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

The testament has no past.

2Co 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

No past of such creature. New with respect to the existing creature.


Hebrews?

Heb 8:13
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

The covenant has no past or existing record.

---

Revelation

Rev 2:17
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

The name has no past record, not bore before by anyone.

We can go on and on. Now to Mark 16:17

When Jesus used kainos, it implies, what has no existence and like i said that is not localized, it must be same everywhere you go, Believers are to be raised from all nations, when they read kainos glossa, they must see it as a tongue that has no previous existence in human race. It cannot be kainos when it is used in China or Nigeria, or UK, that will be allotrios a stranger, foreigner's tongue.

Hence, we must not loose this facts in our interpretation of the doctrine of tongues. New testament, is relative to the old testament, new covenant is relative to the old covenant, new creature (man in Christ) is relative to the old creature (Adamic), hence New tongue is relative to the human tongues, a new tongue/language as relative to existing or human language. It is not a tongue of a tribe or a human nation but the people of God.

Acehart:


Hi,

This verse and its parallels in the synoptic gospels are referred to as “The Great Commission”. Please permit me to infer from the Oxford dictionary meaning of the word “commission“ every now and then in my explanation.

Commission (verb):

1.order or authorize the production of (something). 2. bring (something newly produced) into working condition.

I would like to stick with the second meaning of as it would help me make sense.

One of principles used in interpreting the scriptures is the principle of questioning the situation; I mean one asks: who is speaking? Who is being spoken to? who said it? where was it spoken? etc. For instance: Eliphaz says to Job, “you shall decree a thing and it would come to pass. God then says, “Everything Eliphaz said is a lie”. If I then try to adopt Eliphaz’s word without knowing what God’s reply was, I’ll be in error. Another instance is Jesus’ letter to the seven churches in Asia Minor: if Jesus said anything to the church in Philadelphia, it is strictly for Philadelphia and it shouldn’t be applied to Ephesus.

The dictionary says: “bring something newly produced“. So what was newly produced? The Apostles were newly produced. (Please remember that Jesus sent his disciples in twos in Mark 6:6-7 to preach and cast out devils (without the instruction to speak in new tongues); and they were sent to preach to the Jews only). So the principle of questioning comes into focus: who was Jesus speaking to? The Apostles. (Please notice that this new instruction is to His eleven Apostles (Judas excluded); the previous instruction to the seventy and twelve men in Jesus’ fold referred to as His disciples (Judas included).)

It’s quite straightforward to see that casting out demons in the previous instruction still abides and the method to exorcise the demon-possessed remains. So this instruction concerning casting out of demons is “old”. What is “new” is the instruction concerning “tongues”. The commission began in Mark 16:15 with the instruction to preach to the world; in contrast to the instruction to preach only within the borders of Israel. Now the dilemma comes: they are Galileans or nationals of the Jewish nation who can only speak their native language. The task or working condition (as the dictionary puts it) to preach the gospel in their old (native) language to non-Jewish nationals would be an impossible or tedious one. So, something new has to replace what was old.

Going to the Thayer’s Biblical dictionary translation of the Greek word for “New” - Kainos, meaning:

1. With respect to form: Recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn.
2. With respect to substances: Novel, uncommon, unheard of

Since language is a form rather than a substance, let me dwell in the former definition. The first definition is the same description given to the donkey which no man has ridden on(Luke 19:30); and to Jesus when the guards replied: “No one ever spoke the way this man does” (John 7:46). That donkey was part of a group of animals referred to as “donkeys”; but what set it apart from other donkeys was its quality- purity and newness. Jesus was part of a group of creatures referred to as “man“; but what set Him apart was the mode of His language (speech). The writeup says: “tongue” means “language” or “dialect”. Combining the two definitions and inferring from the illustrations of the donkey and Jesus, we would see that the categorization of this new language belongs is something generic; that generic thing is human languages; but what will differ is the quality of what proceeds from the mouths of the Apostles which will be something unique and fresh while using human language.

Paul then defines this new tongue as: Tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe, but to the unbelieving' (1 Corinthians 14:22). Do the unbelieving understand what isn’t peculiar? - I ask regarding languages.

(Please remember the verse says: these “signs” will accompany those who have believed. The verse didn’t say, shall accompany those who will believe. Were these signs necessary at the beginning (commissioning) of Christianity? Sure, so that Christianity can take root in places beautiful feet haven’t stepped upon.)

I’d like to discontinue for now so that I may rest and perhaps I may get a response to what I have written so far when I awake in the morning.

Good night ma’am

Goshen360:




Let me read side - by - side and compare what was said by both.

Acehart:


I have made a few corrections, sir. So you may have to edit my part.

Goshen360:
This thread is going somewhere and it was a nice comparison reading both commentaries on Mark 16vs17

Let me wait for both hupernikao and Acehart to engage themselves in debate, question and answer before I ask a question.

Both of them saying two different things completely in respect to "new" tongues as in Mark 16vs17.