I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? - Religion (6) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? (16023 Views)
Must Every Believer Speak In Tongues As An Evidence Of Having The Holy Spirit? / Do People Who Speak In Tongues Fake It Or Understand It? / 7 Reasons Why Every Believer Should Speak In Tongues - Kenneth E Hagin (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (20) (Reply) (Go Down)
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Goshen360(m): 9:06am On May 19, 2020 |
^ ^ ^ Now understood and will put that into perspective as the discussion continues while we wait for hoopernikao to comment and hopefully we can move on in the discussion. I have more question(s) though that I will ask from scripture and let you put your explanation above into the scripture. However, let me ask again another question that readily comes to mind so I dont forget and I'll relax a little again so the discussion can continue. MuttleyLaff: How do you put your above explanation into the light of these scriptures 2 cor. 5v17 and Heb 8v8-9 ? Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. .....or better still, .....a new covenant/testament....Heb 8v8-9 Keeping in mind, our new life in Christ is not an upgrade or improvement to our old Adamic life neither is the new covenant an upgrade or compliment or improvement to the old covenant/agreement/testament or are you saying our new life is upgraded or improvement to the old life, new covenant/agreement/testament is an upgraded or improved old covenant/agreement/testament? 2 Likes |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 9:28am On May 19, 2020 |
Goshen360:[img]https://s1/images/MuttAmin.gif[/img] Tag-teaming going on, lmao. I am pleased to see you haven't said your question wasn't satisfactorily answered |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Goshen360(m): 9:56am On May 19, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff: No, I'm saying I understand your perspective and interpretation in the light of the words usage in question and hence, you threw more light on the word usage. So questions further asked above for you to now put those explanations in perspective to what I further asked. I get your understanding of neos and kainos now though. You know I'm in a learning mood and just a student learning in this thread/discussion.  |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 11:33am On May 19, 2020 |
hupernikao: MISINTERPRETATION OF ISAIAH 28:11 BY HOOPERNIKAO - HIS MISINFORMATIONS ____________________________________________________ “ You are the one sir not staying with the context. Key words you neglected in your interpretation includes speaking as a child (blabbing, senseless speech), stammering lips translated from a shameful speaking, a mocking speech. You cant overlook such key words in this context sir.” I have started with the comment of Hupernikao, the num de guerre of my major protagonist on this thread. My reaction to it is similar to that of the “Prince of Preachers” who said: I view the difficulties of Holy Scripture as so many prayer stools upon which I kneel and worship the glorious Lord. What we cannot comprehend by our understandings we apprehend by our affections. (Charles Spurgeon, 1888). So I sought out to write about “the gift of tongues” with sincerity, plainness and trembling; and as I wrote, the words of Ravi Zacharias, “Satan always comes through the back door of imagination; he never comes through the front door of reasoning”, were the hedge that guided my thoughts. I sought to avoid the strongest weapon of misinterpreters - ethymology of words, in my writing so that those who aren’t fit for strong meat may digest the truth easily; when it was finished, I muttered a short prayer to the Lord and clicked “submit”; then came the pruning saw - hupernikao; who came to make my lengthy words fewer, so that it may lengthen again. I praise the Lord for the pruning saw. Matthew Henry in his commentary of Isaiah 28:9 wrote: What method they (Prophets and Ministers) took, in pursuance of this design (to teach them knowledge): They left no means untried to do them good, but taught them as children are taught, little children that are beginning to learn, that are taken from the breast to the book (Isaiah 28:9), for among the Jews it was common for mothers to nurse their children till they were three years old, and almost ready to go to school. And it is good to begin betimes with children, to teach them, as they are capable, the good knowledge of the Lord, and to instruct them even when they are but newly weaned from the milk.. Hoopernikao had this to say in his commentary of Isaiah 28:11: “you speak to a child, babbling alliteration of a child, meaningless gibberish, senseless babbling. That is the word of a child.” From his comment, God spoke to Israel in senseless babbling; he said: “In this case, a senseless speech, unintelligent speaking, a shameful speech is synonymous to children babbling, this is the meaning stammering carried in the scripture.” His comment is borderline derogatory to Israel’s God and not coherent to say to the least. When you compare his interpretation to Matthew Henry’s commentary, Hoopernikao’s interpretation leaves a lot to be desired because his work lacked diligence. Charles Spurgeon has this to say about Matthew Henry’s Commentary: "First among the mighty (commentaries) for general usefulness we are bound to mention the man whose name is a household word, Matthew Henry. He is the most pious and pithy, sound and sensible, suggestive and sober, terse and trustworthy . . . he is deeply spiritual, heavenly, profitable; finding good matter in every text, and from all deducting the most practical and judicious lessons. It is the Christian's companion, suitable to everybody, instructive to all.” As Hoopernikao continued in his comment, he said: In all places where such word is used, it inferred a shameful tongue, a tongue, speaking in derision, mockery tongue. The usage of the word foreign as used by you must be put in context. It means to speak unintelligibly (as if a foreign tongue). No place will you see laeg, stammering used as foreign again in all writings. Matthew Henry then says of Isaiah 28:11: “It should seem, they ridiculed the prophet's preaching, and bantered it. The word of the Lord was unto them Task latsau, kau lakau in the original it is in rhyme they made a song of the prophet's words, and sang it when they were merry over their wine. David was the song of the drunkards. It is great impiety, and a high affront to God, thus to make a jest of sacred things, to speak of that vainly which should make us serious. How severely God would reckon with them for this. 1. He would deprive them of the privilege of plain preaching, and speak to them with stammering lips and another tongue, Isaiah 28:11. Those that will not understand what is plain and level to their capacity, but despise it as mean and trifling, are justly amused with that which is above them. Or God will send foreign armies among them, whose language they understand not, to lay their country waste”. Matthew Henry then describes the word “stammering” as “dreadful voice”. John Gill commentary says: “since they refused instruction in this plain, easy, and gentle manner, by the ministry of the prophets of the Lord, he would speak to them in a more severe and in a rougher manner.” This is the appropriate description of General Rabshakeh’s speech. The forceful insertion of the word “gibberish” by Hoopernikao as the meaning of “stammering” seems suspicious, a view not a few of us have. I spoke of his air of superiority because he showed disdain to all who have devoted years to give us English versions of the Holy Scriptures in the best translations, the sensibilities of all who have read his comment and mostly his disrespect to brothers. His comment regarding God method of teaching Israel as babbling, his translation of the word “stammering“ as babbling, and (maybe) unintentional effort to remove the word “foreign” from the verse doesn’t speak well of his intention. His comment is in direct conflict with Matthew Henry’s comments. Indeed, He will speak to this people Through stammering lips and a foreign tongue. (Isaiah 28:11, NASB) I have thrice responded to Hoopernikao to be patient but he didn’t see his reaction with the right eyes: He said “No place will you see laeg, stammering used as foreign again in all writings.” From the Bible text above (from a Bible version many believe is the best translation of the very first Biblical texts), “stammering” is not used in place of “foreign”, neither has “foreign” taken the place of “stammering”. Muttleylaff had drawn his attention to the “b” part of the text - “and a foreign tongue”, as Paul’s point of focus but he rebuffed his words. In conclusion, the main reason for Hoopernikao’s misinterpretation and misinformation is the lack of focus of the text itself. Perhaps, his incoherence could stem from eisegesis. He cast aspersions to dictionaries, the rules of grammar and even biblical texts. Hoopernikao, perfect patience makes a man perfect. Please, remember to always be patient. The road to greatness isn’t in the sky but in the grave. You didn’t dig and perhaps at no point did you dig you knees in prayers before responding to any of us. When I will respond regarding Mark 16:16-17, May the Lord guide my heart and my fingers. References: 1. Matthew Henry. Commentary of the Whole Bible, Volume 4. 2. Charles H. Spurgeon. Sermon: The Lover of God’s Law Filled with Peace. Jan 22, 1888. 3. John Gills. Exposition of the Whole Bible. 4. New American Standard Bible. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Finallydead: 1:29pm On May 19, 2020 |
Acehart: Acehart, not so sure what the point of this thread is but we might be straying from the spirit of brotherly objective exchange. I can't see hoopernikao's heart but I'll just say we shouldn't cast aspersions because false accusation is also a sin. What's with all this "air of superiority" character assassination label. I think he's only presented his points logically and objectively and if there's any condescension in his heart, I think so far, it's not distinctly expressed in his presentations. Not everyone must come out in the explicitly modest "I just want to learn" conduct that Goshen360 has chosen before we entertain them. Afterall, sometimes even proud people can do that, so it's more about the heart. You presented a sensitive subject. You should be prepared for proper scrutiny from any party and that isn't derogatory in anyway. If you think his points are flawed, you can do due diligence to show him and us all how or just ignore. As for the quoted presentation of yours. I'm sorry but knowledge doesn't work that way. I also respect Spurgeon. But no scripture is of private interpretation. The only authority is the Holy Spirit Himself and we all see in part(1Cor13:9) You've sort of said here, huper has to respect the opinions of other "better" Christians(in your judgment) else he is disdainful. Unknown to you that can be seen as manipulative. If that's your view, maybe we should just close the thread already. A million commentators giving the same interpretation wouldn't make it right as respected as each may be. Not that I agree with all his presentation, my line of thought remains as I've already presented but just so we don't lose the purpose of the thread. And it is not derogatory to say the God of Israel doesn't communicate Himself clearly at times. In fact, this is part of His judgment on the rebellious(Pr26:5, Is6:10, Is44:18, Mat13:13). The holy words though sensible will come to them as unintelligible just as you would expect the message of the gospel to atheists. This was exactly Paul's point that though the words are divine, the hearer's don't understand hence not blessed. It's not an affront to God. So you don't have to sound so pious about that. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 2:30pm On May 19, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff: Bro, your explanation subtlety changing the meaning of neos. And it is either you are mixing things up or you are deliberately manipulating the scriptures even in the face of all evidence in the bible in that word usage. I have given you twice from the scriptures how neos is used. The very verse you quoted showed you what neos is (young). It is unpleasant to try and change the meaning of words when it doesnt exist. Neos was never used for something without a past, i have made that clear to you earlier as below. 1. That statement can mean a new book as in from supermarket, or buy a new book, the book exist on a shelf somewhere, but not in use, hence new. This is NEOS and what you are referring to. The above is the simplest way to can explain neos in English. Trying to modify this as to replace or mean same as kainos is wrong. Even looking at the verse you pointed to: 12 And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living. 13 And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. Is it not clear to you that neos was constantly used as young not in existence but age. Young man, young child. Kainos is not young, it is new. .........USAGE OF KAINOS IN SEPTUAGINT............. I will try to still help in giving you extended study to OT. The Septuagint (Greek translation of Hebrews scriptures) used kainos 53 times in OT. As least the Septuagint is one of the oldest if not the oldest translation into Greek you can have, It existed even before the birth of Jesus and read by the Apostles. Let me show you how it used kainos in the OT 1 Samuel 6:7 KJV 7 Now therefore make A NEW CART, and take two milch kine, on which there hath come no yoke, and tie the kine to the cart, and bring their calves home from them: Such CART was never in use or existed before. You cant look into yesterday and find the cart. He said MAKE, that is enough for you to know it never existed before now. That is the new (kainos) David used it severally when referring to a NEW SONG Psalms 40:3 KJV(i) 3 And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD. New song here means to compose a song. That is not learning an existing song. To compose and get a song that hasnt being song before. That is how kainos was used all through in the Old Greek. ..............USAGE OF NEOS IN SEPTUAGINT.................. In all cases of usage of neos in OT from Greek translation, it was never used to mean NEW but YOUNG. See below all the places NEOS was used in the OT. Genesis 19:31 to the younger, Genesis 19:34 to the younger, Genesis 19:35 also: and the younger Genesis 19:38 And the younger, Genesis 25:23 the younger. Genesis 29:26 the younger Genesis 43:33 and the youngest Genesis 48:14 who was the younger, Joshua 6:26 and in his youngest Judges 6:15 and I am the least 1 Samuel 9:21 the least 1 Kings 16:34 of it in his youngest Job 30:1 But now they that are younger Job 32:6 I am young, Psalms 68:27 There is little Psalms 119:141 I am small Isaiah 60:22 and a small one Jeremiah 14:3 their little ones Jeremiah 48:4 her little ones Jeremiah 49:20 Surely the least Jeremiah 50:45 Surely the least Micah 5:2 though thou art little It was never an issue in OT at all to mean new, only kainos was used for new. Neos will relate to something existing already while kainos means not existing. Trying to wrestle this because of your set mind to adhere to your teaching on tongues is wrong. It will mean dishonesty. In all, it is your choice if you cling to your understanding even when it is obvious you are wrong, but it is very bad when you chose to consistently write in public space what is not true and you know it. You are deliberately manipulating the word of God. Dont forget that people have access to these bible materials and concordance, dont present yourself in bad light because of this struggle. You have no gain in that. You wont only be hurting yourself but others you intend to convince. You cant because you want to defend tongues as human language then manipulate what new tongues means. Be careful the position of your heart in this discussion. And now that you have seen that all through the OT, neos was used to only mean young not new and kainos was consistently used as new, i hope you can submit to scriptures. 1 Like |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 2:42pm On May 19, 2020 |
Finallydead: Hi, I trust your day is going on well. It rained finally and the weather is clement. I appreciate your comment. I’m excited. You have spoken well. Sometimes, some questions hurt; sometimes some gestures hurt (I have in mind when that lawyer stood up to test the rabbi, when tradition says he should sit and ask). I pleaded with him to be patient more than once and for every response, there was a rebuff. He asked for a honest discussion but everything he did offer ended with opinions rather than questions. I told a friend of mine that he always doubted my opinions because I haven’t written a book. I think hoopernikao is like my friend. So what should I do, Finallydead? I would pitch him against people everyone respects - the best; that is why you have said: “You've sort of said here, huper has to respect the opinions of other "better" Christians”. Could that be manipulative? Perhaps. It may silence him but I would have lost him for good. For my sake, I hope he doesn’t slip away.Thanks man/woman |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 3:00pm On May 19, 2020 |
Acehart: But you know that everything you wrote here didnt address the question at hand which is Isa 28:11. The usage and meaning of the word "laeg". All your explanation have subtlety avoided the real situation. You said, i misinterpreted Isa 28:11, what i expected from you is to take the scripture and explain. I HAVE ASKED A MILLION TIMES THAT YOU SHOULD EXPLAIN WHAT LAEG MEANS. But you kept avoiding. There is a way that word was used all through the bible, state them here and be consistent with it. You cant change bible meaning to suit a doctrine. What you will do is to drop the doctrine and embrace bible facts. Note, i didnt give any meaning or definition to stammering (laeg), i gave you exactly the meaning as used in the original language (Hebrew). I will still give you again though it seems we are in cycle. I also gave you its root word and its application from the bible. Those arent my word. See below my explanation in quote The word stammering was translated from the Hebrew word lâ‛êg. It is simply translated as mocking, a mocker, a buffoon. It was used only 2 times in the OT (Isa 28:11, Ps 36:16) Now the issue is, you never look at Isa 28:11, mentioned and try to explain what stammering is when used in the bible. But said i misinterpret.. To your reference to Hezekiah period.: The events was well documented in 2Ki 18, 2Kin 19 and Isa 36, Isa 37 almost as copy and paste, you can read it. Let me point you to this quick mistake you should correct. 1, the Assyrian has a known language and it is well understood by the Hebrew as seen in 2Ki 18, 2Kin 19 and Isa 36, Isa 37. 2Ki 18:26 Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews' language in the ears of the people that are on the wall. The Assyrian language (Syrian, Syriac) cant be a language of mockery even to the Jews, it is well know and documented. 2. There is a bible term for the Assyrian language and its not stammering or laeg, check your concordance and references well. The Assyrian language which is usually called Syriac is interpreted in Hebrew as "Aramiyth" the Syrian tongue. Bible always differentiate this from other forms of language. Hence if Isa 28:11 couldnt have used stammering (laeg) to described it. Anytime we the bible refer to Assyrian language, it is interpreted from Aramiyth Gibberish defined as "talking that sounds or looks like real words or authentic speech" is also not my word. It is well documented, check (examples dot yourdictionary dot com) And dont forget that you are the one who claimed that Isa 28:11 was referring to Assyrian tongue not me. Please check. I have made you know severally that it is a shameful, derided language, like children babbling that Isaiah referred to and that is obvious in the usage of the same word stammering (laeg) all through the scriptures. In all, you are only trying to rewrite the scriptures by neglecting the exact word used. If you are sure of your interpretation of usage of stammering in Is 28:11, post here its meaning as translated from Hebrews (laeg) and examine how it was used all through. It is not an hidden thing or personal interpretation. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 3:46pm On May 19, 2020 |
hoopernikao: Tsk, 1. Do you know I only checked for the meaning of Laeg from your findings, in good faith? You gave two: Mockery and unintelligible. I picked one - mockery. Please read the conclusion of my first extensive response to you on Isaiah 28. I have not avoided talking about Laeg. You should read General Rabshekeh’s speech and you would see Laeg in it - the mockery Laeg. What you wouldn’t see is the unintelligible Laeg 2. You said: the Hebrews understood the Syrian language. Hmmm. Please be patient when you read. Your reference from the Book of Kings and Josephus’ record says it is Hezekiah’s friends alone that understood Aramaic. 2 Kings 18:26: Then Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebnah and Joah, said to Rabshakeh, "Speak now to your servants in Aramaic, foer we understand it; and do not speak with us in Judean in the hearing of the people who are on the wall." Please read and see that all Israel didn’t know Aramaic. All Israel didn’t understand Aramaic as you said. 3. The synonyms of of the word “Language” are: speech, dialect, jargon, terminology, lingo, vernacular, word, style, sound etc. For examples: A superior could say to a subordinate: you people do like you don’t have sense. The subordinate then replies: sir, I don’t like your language. Language in this example means the “manner of speech” or “word” employed by the superior. This is the use the scriptures employs. The Syrians would use harsh or mocking language (words). Language means the “manner of words” or “tone”. 4. I gave the meaning of gibberish from two of the renowned dictionaries. Maybe I didn’t check Chambers dictionary.  I am not trying to rewrite the scriptures. I’ll need help from other, please. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 7:36pm On May 19, 2020 |
Acehart: AS AN ASIDE: I guess i didnt let you know from beginning my stand on scriptural doctrine and practice. Please note this is my believe in bible explanation. I believe absolutely in the authority of the scriptures, I mean absolutely (100000%). If you show me anything and i can see it written as such in the bible, that is final and will make correction immediately. But trying to show me what isnt written or want me to go by reading meaning to the authors intent when it isnt documented. I will rather lay my life down than compromise the scriptures on that. The written word is above all. I say this so that it will guide your response as i am not seeing you using scriptures but reading meaning to events to interpret. Now, in your above quote, There is nothing like[b] laeg as mockery and laeg as unintelligible?[/b] Bros stop this. Laeg is Laeg o, It is mockery, it is unintelligible. Laeg wasnt used at all in that conversation above, so stay with that, no need for touch-lighting and seeking what is not there. And as per your quote above "to see what wasnt written in that verse". Do you mean by your own interpretation or by bible word? What you intend is that i should see it even when it is not written that what Rabshekeh did was laeg?. That will be your own explanation o. I want bible explanation. Bible explanation is that laeg is a derision, mockery, and that is different from abuse, curse, shout at, rebuke, speak of something badly only. Laeg mean to mock. You will need to get a good grasp of what mocking meaning and when you do, that is exactly what you will see in tongues speaking both in act and practice. And like i said, trying to defend what is obvious in text isnt a good sign, but in good faith, i will give you again, places and how laeg was used all through the bible. laeg (only 2 times) Psalms 35:16 mockers Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering I will also help you with its Greek New Testament counterpart. The closer words to laeg in Greek NT are katagelaō and ekmukterizō. See their usage below. katagelaō: to laugh down, i.e. deride. From two words kata and gelao. Gelao means "to laugh". Just to laugh. Matthew 9:24 they laughed Mark 5:40 they laughed Luke 8:53 they laughed katagelaō: is from two words kata and gelao. Gelao means "to laugh". Just to laugh. Used only twice. Luk 6:21 Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh. Luk 6:25 Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep. So, when you see kata added, it means its now stronger. Also we have ekmukterizō: to deride by turning up the nose, to sneer at, to scoff at Luke 16:14 they mocked Luke 23:35 mocked In none of these will you see any spoken intelligent act or language. These are the closest in Greek. Please ensure you are opening and reading these verses, it is important as i am still wondering how you havent seen it. If in this, you still defending what is wrong and trying to wrestle your meaning in, then that isnt honest. Bible interpretation must be guided by word usage all across the scriptures. I have taken through Genesis to Revelation on this issue with consistent explanation or [b]laeg, kainos, neos, laag, the way they are used are the same all through. You can now say we should be seeing (insinuating) what wasnt written or applied. That will be your interpretation.[/b] In all, you have never since we started pointed me to a place where these word contradict themselves or wrongly applied to support you. All you have been showing is that we should see or imply from a narration, events or story, good bible students cant be produced from such, A true and good bible student must maintain, retain, contend and extend the same doctrine, words, explanation as delivered to the early saints. And that is what is required of us. Ensure your heart is pure having labor to show you all these all through the scriptures. You may now need to listen to your heart if truly you can find fault in this explanation. I will proceed to my next explanation. 1 Like |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 7:40pm On May 19, 2020 |
hupernikao: PART 3: Acts 2:4 OTHER/ANOTHER TONGUE For Part 1 check link below www.nairaland.com/5860057/should-speak-tongues-right#89591415 For Part 2 check link below www.nairaland.com/5860057/should-speak-tongues-right/2#89615517 Not TO LOSE focus of the discussion, i will give a paraphrase to recall where we started from. The work at hand is to loose at the concept of speaking in tongues in the scriptures as related to what the OP implies. One of the most basic thing that is usually neglected is to pay attention to keywords used for statements in the scriptures. Most times we end up carrying out own meaning in because of this neglect. The same is with the issue of tongues. And i posit in this post that to handle the issue of tongues properly, we must first of all examine the usage (in grammar) of tongues by the author to first determine word intent of the authors then we can extend this to explaining the concepts of tongues as taught or spoken by the same. It will be wrong to neglect or carry a different meaning of words from what the author used in explaining tongues and still claim to have handle the scriptures properly. Most times, this issue arises from the mode of the bible translation at hand as all translation are by relativity interpretation of text and in most cases many of them will carry their own meaning into the original sense. This has led to either removing or adding to text of the scriptures in the landing language of the translator, For example: (this is an aside for now, we will treat this well later if required). Some translations such as ESV (Easy to Read version) in translating 1 Cor 14:4 committed sincere but great error in insert the word different in explaining tongues. 1 Cor 14:4 Those who speak in a different language are helping only themselves. But those who prophesy are helping the whole church. The word "different" never occurred in the original but was inserted by the translator to drive home his own interpretation or understanding of tongue. That has given rise to many error in treating this same passage. The original has no such word in this context and it is suicidal to have handle it as such. 1 Cor 14:4 ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ. ho lalōn glōssē heauton oikodomei ho de prophēteuōn lalon glosse ---->> speak tongues In above, what we have is "speak tongues (languages)". There is no occurrence of the word "different". Greek lexicon has a word for difference (diastole), it wasnt used, even a closer word, diversities (diaresis) wasnt used. But the translator inserted that likely for doctrinal convenience and also carried that in all its usage of tongues in that chapter. For reason as such, it is not uncommon to have to result to the original word study and lexicon to avoid such pitfall. The reason this thread has taken such direction. It is therefore cant be strange to refer to this original writings when treating issues of tongue so as to the scripture stand on this without bias or addition to the letters. Tongues when mentioned in the scriptures as spiritual gifts were mostly describe by adjective which are very important in understanding the concept. So, the first direction is to examine this adjective all round the scriptures and come to a conclusion on this. We have considered the following: Isa 28:11 (Part 1) Stammering lips (why stammering, laeg?) Mark 16:17 (Part 2) New Tongue (why new, kainos)? Next we will consider Acts 2:4 PART 3: Acts 2:4 OTHER/ANOTHER TONGUE Acts 2 described an event of the first instance of tongues as spoken by Jesus. We saw believers received the gift of the Holy Ghost and spoke in other tongues. I will keep the focus on the adjective for now, we may have detailed explanation of Acts 2 as time goes on. Acts 2:4 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Luke stated what happened on the Pentecost was another tongue. In paying attention, we must notice that Luke likewise qualified the tongue as other. The Greek word translated as another/other is the word "heteros" HETEROS of two: another, a second, other, different, another but distinct in kind" , another of a different quality, one not of the same nature, form, class, kind; One of the problem of translating heteros in English is that English doesn't have a word to actually described it or differentiate it from its counterpart (allos). For example In English, if i have Apple and i need another apple, i can say, give me another fruit. Lets say another apple is handed to me. I will say i have another fruit. But if a orange is handed to me, in English, i will still say i have[b] another[/b] fruit. Now, here the word "another" doesnt show any difference but in Greek, the words are different. having an apple as another fruit will be differentiated from having a orange as another fruit because they are not the same kind of fruits. Hence in Greek we have two words to describe another/other (Heteros/Allos) Heteros: will mean another of different kind, apple and orange (fruit but different kind) Allos: will mean another of same kind, apple and another apple (both are fruit of the same kind) In John 14:16 Jesus in describing the HolyGhost, he used allos (same kind as me), the reason he called him comforter. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; [b]Allos Paraklete, another comforter, that is same kind just as me. When this is used, it bears the same nature. But when heteros is used it represent different kind. I will give you key places to note in usage of heteros In Gal 1:8-9 Paul spoke about another gospel (heteros euaggelion) He used heteros (gospel of a different kind) Gal 1:8-9 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Here it implies a gospel of different nature and kind as against the existing gospel he preaches. Compound Usage in the Bible: 1. Heterosdidaskaleo Form two words, hetero[/b]s (another/other), [b]didaskalia (doctrine/teaching) 1 Tim 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 1 Timothy 6:3 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; It implies a teaching that is never of the same origin or kind as that which he teaches. 2. Heteroglóssos: one who speaks what is utterly strange and unintelligible to others unless interpreted. 1 Cor 14:26 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. Referring to Isa 28:11 3. Heterozugeo: to be yoked up differently, to be unequally yoked, but unevenly matched. 2 Corinthians 6:14 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? Comparing two different nature. In most places[b] heteros[/b] is used, it points to a different nature, kind and origin. Note that heteros as an adjective will qualify the noun it relates to. heteros didaskaleo another gospel point to the nature of the teaching, hence another tongue will be pointing to the tongue. Another to what? If the another is to point to a different human language, Luke has other words available to use. The word different/differences (diaresis) which can be used to make distinction and differences wasnt used. Paul used this in 1 Cor 12 4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. Diaresis will be in-comparison similar things existing, such as different human language. Same thing as diastole (a separation, a difference). Romans 3:22 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: Hence if a different language (as related to human language eg Chinese/Japanese), Luke could have used diastole glossa. But he used heteros, a key distinction that means another language of different sorts, origin and kind. Every human language surely have the same source and origin from Babel, same kind (human language). Babel (Genesis 11:1-9) doesnt have derision or mockery of each other, only lack of understanding hence the separation. But the new (kainos) tongue Jesus promised will be an heteros from the existing language, a language of derision, mockery and senseless.[/b] We will surely see later why this. Luke the writer, must have seen a distinction of what they spoke on the day of Pentecost in comparison to what human language sound like. Dont forget [b] Isa 28, it is a language of mockery and derision, that cant be close to human language. Human language have clear sounds even if you dont understand, tongues dont. The very early response of those in Acts 2 showed mocking, strange and derision (laeg) before the understanding came afterwards (we will see later). In language spoken in Acts 2, why the mocking, derision, abuse from the same people who heard them? This calls for proper study and not assumptions, the reason such teaching as tongues must be taken carefully, seriously and step-wisely and i hope we do here too. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 8:19pm On May 19, 2020 |
hoopernikao:"chadash", in Hebrew is a word, when used as an adjective, is descriptive with meaning suggesting new, new things, something new, something fresh etcetera. Example of this, is seen, when talking about the mercies of God, as used in Lamentations 3:22-23 shown below. "22The faithful love of the LORD never ends! His mercies never cease. 23Great is His faithfulness; His mercies begin afresh each morning (i.e. They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness)" - Lamentations 3:22-23 They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness They, is a pronoun are is a verb new is an adjective every, is a determiner morning, is noun. Faithfulness is fidelity; the quality of being faithful, where faithful itself, is adjective great is an adjective is, a verb Your, is a determiner Faithfulness, is noun. Faithfulness is fidelity; the quality of being faithful, where faithful itself, is adjective If you remove all the adjectives, from the above open and closed bracket Lamentations 3:23 sentence, what would you be left with? Don't worry telling me, as I'll do, for you, lmao. You’ll be left with the following sentence: "They are every morning; is Your faithfulness" It doesn't really make much or proper sense, does it? Of course it doesn't, because you can detect how the life and/or colour of the Lamentations 3:23 sentence has been removed. The information about the quantity (i.e. how much) and the quality (i.e. how well) of the object of the discussion (i.e. mercy/mercies) in Lamentations 3:23, that helps ascertain or compare things (e.g. new and great,) by description, is missing, as we removed them. The three degrees of an adjective are: positive, comparative and superlative. What you see used, in Lamentations 3:23 above are two positive adjectives, namely, new, in regards to God's mentioned mercy & great, in regards to God's mentioned faithfulness, lmao. The thing about adjectives, is, they are useful tools for effective, sensible and able to be understood communications. Hebrew native speakers aren't left out, they too are aware of how wonderful, amazing and fantastic adjectives are and so why they used them much more often as well as others do too. There is more juice in the tank, lmao, so lets move on. Fyi hoopernikao aka hupernikao, "chadash", the same and unchanged word, in Hebrew, at the appropriate other moment, is also used as a verb, where it gives meaning, in relation to the action done or carried out, on the quality and/or quantity. Like what’s done to the quality, what’s been done to the quantity, and so expressed with suggestions like, make anew, renew/renewed, to renew, make anew, repair, restore/restored, rebuild, bring back, bring fresh et cetera (e.g. 1 Samuel 11:14, Job 10:17, Psalm 51:12, Psalm 103:5, Lamentations 5:21, Isaiah 61:4 et cetera) We can see how in the Old Testament, even in the Greek version, known as Septuagint, so called Septuagint because of the Latin word septuaginta, which means 70, then also because 70 to 72 Jewish scholars reportedly took part in the translation process of the Hebrew Old Testament Bible translation to Greek, hence why in that regards its called the Septuagint. Sorry for the slight digression up there, lmao. As I was saying ojaare, we can see how in the Old Testament, a different Hebrew word, which is “tsair,” is what’s used for young/younger/youngest and its the equivalent to the Greek word “neos,” with both with meaning, that suggests, least, little, little one, least one, small, small one, young/younger/youngest, insignificant, idea of insignificance et cetera In Hebrew language constructs, you can’t use “chadash”, for young/younger/youngest because the the Hebrew adjective “tsair” is what is absolutely used and not the Hebrew adjective “chadash” In Hebrew part of speech, “tsair” is whats used for instances of young/younger/youngest and not “chadash” The Greek word “neos” combines, new on the scene, not there before, new in time, recently born, et cetera with young, youthful, younger by birth, servant as in, inferior in rank, younger by birth et cetera, but its equivalent, the Hebrew positive adjective word “chadash” doesn’t. “Chadash” deviates from its Greek equivalent “neos” counterpart, by yielding to another Hebrew word, a comparative and superlative adjective word, in the person of “tsair”, to describe instances of young/younger/youngest. The Old Testament, originally WAS NOT Septuagint, it in fact originally is written in Paleo-Hebrew alphabet, so I don’t understand why hoopernikao aka hupernikao, is stubbornly hell-bent on adhering and focusing on the Greek word “neos”. It has been shown that “kainos”, is not just “neos” but its new with improve, so when or if talking about the hoopernikao aka hupernikao instanced Genesis19:31, 34, 35 and 38, 1 Kings 16:34, 1 Samuel 9:21 right up to Micah 5:2, in the original Paleo-Hebrew alphabet text, it is the Hebrew word “tsair”, a comparative and superlative adjective word, that is preferred, instead of the Hebrew positive adjective word “chadash,” all this because Hebrew makes the distinction where Greek doesn’t, wasn’t or didn’t want to. As for Psalms 40:3, we have a description here, describing a song, hence its the Hebrew adjective word, chadash used here and used descriptively, in every sense of the word. It is not a “young/younger/youngest” song (i.e. it isn’t ’’tsair’’) but it is a new song, it is “chadash”. Of course, its neos in Greek, but in Hebrew, it correctly, is and will be “chadash”, the adjective with the positive slant. There is nothing “kainos” in the Psalms 40:3 new song. There is nothing alluding to “chadash”, the adjective verb, in regards to the new song in Psalms 40:3. It is a regular song like any other song just as Goshen360 hypothetical new baby born is. They both are recent songs, with nothing extra except from being recent. This is why, both have chadash, the descriptive adjective being used (i.e. used for new thing, new things, for something new, for something fresh et cetera) hoopernikao aka hupernikao, after the reggae, we will play the blues, lmao. When we get to 1 Corinthians 13:1 “tongues of men and of angels” and/or “languages of humans and of angels “ (i.e. angelic language) bridge, of course, we certainly will cross it, lmao. I am not on this thread, to convince anyone hoopernikao aka hupernikao. It is not in my purview to do so. I thought I have previously already made known whose responsibility that is, lmao. I am humbly here, to simply pull open wide ajar the door to let the light in. I don’t impose, I don’t force, I don’t push anyone in through the door. All I am here to do is, open the door, and whoever is interested, must enter by their own accord. Something must kill a man, lmao. “Ayé yí o le o, Ayé lo maye le. Ayé lomu aye le” loosely translated means "It isn’t a difficult world. Its humans, who make the world a difficult place to live on, whereas, the world itself, isn't really meant to be a difficult place to live on” This isn’t “Game of Thrones” hoopernikao aka hupernikao, lmao, where you either win or you die. On here, the readership, has a strong chance of learning something, more from this thread than from an insane idea of wanting to win or holding on to dead leaves, for fear of losing. hoopernikao aka hupernikao, with all due respect, please spare the thread, all this your displayed pontifications because if a crooked stick is placed before the floor, no one needs explain how crooked it is. All that’s required, is to lay a straight stick down by the side of it, and the work is well done. The truth is revealed and error will stand abashed, lmao. Also, I expect everyone not to believe and swallow hook, line, sinker and all. Not to take on face value what the interlocutors put out, but I expect everyone to do a Berean Acts 17:10-11 and cross check with the Spirit of Truth. hoopernikao aka hupernikao, don't be surprised if you get slammed into the cooler by the algorithm because of your fun of doing lengthy post. Once you cross that threshold, thats when you get sprung with posting privileges withdrawn and your post hidden from view. Do a kiss with your post by keeping it simple and short. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 10:14pm On May 19, 2020 |
hoopernikao: 2 Kings 18:19 Then Rabshakeh said to them, "Say now to Hezekiah, 'Thus says the great king, the king of Assyria, "What is this confidence that you have? 2 Kings 18:20 You say (but they are only empty words), 'I have counsel and strength for the war.' Now on whom do you rely, that you have rebelled against me? 2 Kings 18:21 Now behold, you rely on the staff of this crushed reed, even on Egypt; on which if a man leans, it will go into his hand and pierce it. So is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who rely on him. 2 Kings 18:22 But if you say to me, 'We trust in the Lord our God,' is it not He whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah has taken away, and has said to Judah and to Jerusalem, 'You shall worship before this altar in Jerusalem'? 2 Kings 18:23 Now therefore, come, make a bargain with my master the king of Assyria, and I will give you two thousand horses, if you are able on your part to set riders on them. 2 Kings 18:24 How then can you repulse one official of the least of my master's servants, and rely on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? 2 Kings 18:25 Have I now come up without the Lord's approval against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, 'Go up against this land and destroy it.’” 2 Kings 18:27 But Rabshakeh said to them, "Has my master sent me only to your master and to you to speak these words, and not to the men who sit on the wall, doomed to eat their own dung and drink their own urine with you?" 2 Kings 18:28 Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in Judean, saying, "Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:29 Thus says the king, 'Do not let Hezekiah deceive you, for he will not be able to deliver you from my hand; 2 Kings 18:30 nor let Hezekiah make you trust in the Lord, saying, "The Lord will surely deliver us, and this city will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria." 2 Kings 18:31 Do not listen to Hezekiah, for thus says the king of Assyria, "Make your peace with me and come out to me, and eat each of his vine and each of his fig tree and drink each of the waters of his own cistern, 2 Kings 18:32 until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of grain and new wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of olive trees and honey, that you may live and not die." But do not listen to Hezekiah when he misleads you, saying, "The Lord will deliver us." 2 Kings 18:33 Has any one of the gods of the nations delivered his land from the hand of the king of Assyria? 2 Kings 18:34 Where are the gods of Hamath and Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim, Hena and Ivvah? Have they delivered Samaria from my hand? 2 Kings 18:35 Who among all the gods of the lands have delivered their land from my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem from my hand?'" 2 Kings 18:36 But the people were silent and answered him not a word, for the king's commandment was, "Do not answer him." And when Rabshakeh saw them, he bid them go and speak to Hezekiah in the manner following: that “Sennacherib, the great King, desires to know of him, on whom it is that he relies, and depends, in flying from his Lord? and will not hear him, nor admit his army into the city? Is it on account of the Egyptians, and in hopes that his army would be beaten by them? Whereupon he lets him know, that if this be what he expects, he is a foolish man, and like one who leans on a broken reed: while such an one will not only fall down, but will have his hand pierced and hurt by it. That he ought to know, he makes this expedition against him by the will of God; who hath granted this favour to him, that he shall overthrow the Kingdom of Israel; and that in the very same manner he shall destroy those that are his subjects also.” (Antiquities of the Jews) If you don’t see mockery, derision or ridicule in the speech, wetin I go do? See you tomorrow, God willing |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 10:46pm On May 19, 2020 |
hoopernikao:interesting ...  hoopernikao:But isn't that precisely what you, and several other posters have been engaged in for several pages now? |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 10:53pm On May 19, 2020 |
hoopernikao: Acehart:Someone's just confessed to ONLY obeying the literal interpretation of the words AND gives no thought necessarily about the intent of the author nor consideration given to who the audience addressed are or who is targeted by the author. At the emboldened in your above mentioned, I wish you God's increasing grace with the one, who has confessed to ONLY obeying the letter of the law but not the spirit. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 11:57pm On May 19, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff: You may really need to take a good lesson in bible study maybe from using book of my bible story as it is obvious there is a lot you really need to learn about the scriptures and you should start from your cradle. That you cant even understand what letter and spirit means is really a big concern as a Christian. You called God's inspired written, documented word as letter of the law? I doubt you have regard or honor neither knowledge of who God is. This is very shameful for such to proceed from a so called believer. What do you know about the spirit? If we throw it open on move and abilities of the spirit, what do you know or have experienced? You just disdained God's word with your utterances. A very big shame. This same word was preserved by men of old with their blood and life. Men who gave all so that you can have same thing you just disdained because of your laziness to study and read properly. Is that not shameful enough? Men were burned just to hide a copy of your "letter of the law" so that it can get to you, yet you mocked it. Very saddening. You truly dont understand what you just said and whoever is teaching you God's word is either doing a very bad job or you are wasting his time. That same letter (the written word) you called letter of the law is God's Inspiration (2 Tim 3:16), do you know what that means? that same letter is what gave life to many today serving Jesus if you are among. You must be one of those people who read their bible upside-down to have referred to God's word as letter of the law. Men like are the roots of all misconception about Christianity and source of many loosing their faith. A man who cant trust the truth of God's word, a man who cant honor the scriptures as what God truly breath out, as the absolute and only inspired document for mankind is talking about the spirit. I am truly ashamed of your comment. And it seems there is nothing someone wont see on this Nairaland. Bro, you are just a stone throw from Atheism. Just a minute late for it, better start praying and repent because with these utterances, you will soon call God a liar. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 11:59pm On May 19, 2020 |
Kobojunkie: Can you please point out where exactly. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by hoopernikao: 12:08am On May 20, 2020 |
Acehart: Bro, i cant see o What i am seeing is you reading mockery in. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 12:26am On May 20, 2020 |
hoopernikao:What have you all been attempting to do? Read the bible as it is written? Or suggest your own meanings for the words in question? |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Etifinity: 1:41am On May 20, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff:please how do u pray in the holy ghost? |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 2:03am On May 20, 2020 |
Etifinity:I waited and I think the answer is here I think it refers to what Paul described as groaning sounds. I was just sitting with my laptop, attention between my show on Hulu and Nairaland. And just like that it started. Words are not coming out, just groaning of some sort. When I open my mouth wide to speak, just sounds (no words) coming out, no matter how hard I try to force myself back to using words. I would not describe it as a pleasant experience. I don't know about anyone else but the feeling of being "remote controlled" by some ALIEN entity remains  I kept hoping my roomate would not walk into the room wandering why I was groaning and looking like I was freaking out. LOLI wonder what the experience of others with this is. I too would like to know How others really do this praying in the spirit thing. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 4:53am On May 20, 2020 |
hoopernikao: Cc: Finallydead 1 Like |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 5:07am On May 20, 2020 |
Etifinity: Hi. Please create a thread asking this question and I’ll give you an answer. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Acehart: 5:10am On May 20, 2020 |
hoopernikao: 2 Kings 18:19 Then Rabshakeh said to them, "Say now to Hezekiah, 'Thus says the great king, the king of Assyria, "What is this confidence that you have? 2 Kings 18:20 You say (but they are only empty words), 'I have counsel and strength for the war.' Now on whom do you rely, that you have rebelled against me? 2 Kings 18:21 Now behold, you rely on the staff of this crushed reed, even on Egypt; on which if a man leans, it will go into his hand and pierce it. So is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who rely on him. 2 Kings 18:22 But if you say to me, 'We trust in the Lord our God,' is it not He whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah has taken away, and has said to Judah and to Jerusalem, 'You shall worship before this altar in Jerusalem'? 2 Kings 18:23 Now therefore, come, make a bargain with my master the king of Assyria, and I will give you two thousand horses, if you are able on your part to set riders on them. 2 Kings 18:24 How then can you repulse one official of the least of my master's servants, and rely on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? 2 Kings 18:25 Have I now come up without the Lord's approval against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, 'Go up against this land and destroy it.’” 2 Kings 18:27 But Rabshakeh said to them, "Has my master sent me only to your master and to you to speak these words, and not to the men who sit on the wall, doomed to eat their own dung and drink their own urine with you?" 2 Kings 18:28 Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in Judean, saying, "Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:29 Thus says the king, 'Do not let Hezekiah deceive you, for he will not be able to deliver you from my hand; 2 Kings 18:30 nor let Hezekiah make you trust in the Lord, saying, "The Lord will surely deliver us, and this city will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria." 2 Kings 18:31 Do not listen to Hezekiah, for thus says the king of Assyria, "Make your peace with me and come out to me, and eat each of his vine and each of his fig tree and drink each of the waters of his own cistern, 2 Kings 18:32 until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of grain and new wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of olive trees and honey, that you may live and not die." But do not listen to Hezekiah when he misleads you, saying, "The Lord will deliver us." 2 Kings 18:33 Has any one of the gods of the nations delivered his land from the hand of the king of Assyria? 2 Kings 18:34 Where are the gods of Hamath and Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim, Hena and Ivvah? Have they delivered Samaria from my hand? 2 Kings 18:35 Who among all the gods of the lands have delivered their land from my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem from my hand?'" 2 Kings 18:36 But the people were silent and answered him not a word, for the king's commandment was, "Do not answer him." Check again please. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 5:28am On May 20, 2020 |
hoopernikao:  "He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant --not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. (i.e. It is He also who has made us competent to serve Him in connexion with a new Covenant, which is not a written code but a Spirit; for the written code inflicts death, but the Spirit gives Life)" - 2 Corinthians 3:6 "To those who are perishing, we are a dreadful smell of death and doom. But to those who are being saved, we are a life-giving perfume. And who is adequate, for such a task, as this?" - 2 Corinthians 2:16 Ignorance and arrogance are a lethal combination. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than with this one, who pontificates, huffs and puffs all over the place, largely from knowing enough to think is right, but not enough to know is wrong and know nothing about all that's being discussed Dont get me wrong, I am just mystified by the idea of how someone by their unrighteousness and bullpiss, goes to great lengths to suppress the truth. Suppressing truth, in favour of engaging in vicious and unrighteous passions. Smh. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 5:29am On May 20, 2020 |
Etifinity: Acehart:"17But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. 18They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” 19These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit 20But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, (i.e. dear friends, keep building on the foundation of your most holy faith, as the Holy Spirit helps you to pray But you, dear friends, must build each other up in your most holy faith, pray in the power of the Holy Spirit) 21keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life" - Jude 1:17-21 There is no need to go create a thread asking this question because it can easily and quickly be given an answer(s) here Etifinity, between you, me and the gate post, to pray in the Holy Ghost, is talking about the attitude, in which we are to pray, so in the simplest manner, it doesn't, if you had Jude 1:20 in mind, have anything to do with speaking in tongues but means what it says out of the tin. It means, literally pray in the Holy Spirit, as in like, settle for one of those ''Thy will be done'' prayer moments. Now you're probably asking yourself, that, whats a ''Thy will be done'' prayer moment or how does one do a ''Thy will be done'' prayer? The answer to either of those two, is the classic demonstration of this, as done by Yahushua Ha Mashsiach, aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide word. Now before I show how Yahushua, aka Jesus prayed in the spirit, please permit me, to first write the next following: God, is a Spirit, we, as spirit beings try to connect with God, so we need to pray in the spirit, in order to associate ourselves with what is happening or is about to happen in the Spirit realm, we need to be able to link with what is happening in the Spirit's world, as in, God's great/grand scheme of things. Now whenever we pray in the spirit, we literally are positioning our "satellite dish or antenna" for good and maximum reception signal strength to get sharp pictures and/or clear broadcast signals from God and the Spirit realm, because we essentially are praying in tune or in accordance with God's "His will be done" and not our will. It is important to know that without tuning in, (i.e. without praying in the spirit) then distortions, bad reception, ugly feedbacks, clashing station frequencies signals etcetera will be the end result and/or product, and we end up praying out of tune, praying amiss, praying off target and/or doing the ultimate prayer of the flesh. Now, cycling back to how Yahushua, aka Jesus did the ''Thy will be done'' prayer, please note that Jesus, in Luke 22:42, while in the garden of Gethsemane, prayed the "Thy will be done" prayer and so thereby submitting and giving in to God's overall and ever better will, whatever circumstances we are in. 1 Like |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 5:29am On May 20, 2020 |
Kobojunkie: MuttleyLaff: MuttleyLaff: |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 5:51am On May 20, 2020 |
Paul suggested it... that seems to be the reason
|
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 6:02am On May 20, 2020 |
10To end my letter I tell you, be strong in the Lord and in his great power. Kobojunkie:[img]https://s3/images/ObamaMuttley.gif[/img] So? What if Apostle Paul suggesting it, hmm? 1/ How is "pray in the Spirit, at all times" then done? 2/ What is the reason for to "pray in the Spirit," and not just that but to, at all times? 3/ So yeah, why pray, in the Spirit, at all times? 4/ What specifically and/or actually, does "in the Spirit" mean? 5/ Would it be that, one, can pray out the Spirit and/or even pray, out, of the Spirit? Now some clever clog, the likes of a hoopernikao aka hupernikao, will come to the thread, pontificating, strutting about as if like a constipated peacock, and be saying the intent of the author doesn't matter, that the spirit doesn't matter, its the letter that reigns supreme. That the intent of the author should be overlooked, that consideration shouldn't be given to who is, the audience, the author is addressing or who is his/her write-up targeted at et cetera |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 6:47am On May 20, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff:Well, Jesus didn't say anything about praying in the Spirit, Paul did. And Paul suggests, at least in Ephesians 6, that all should pray in the Spirit all the times. |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by MuttleyLaff: 7:12am On May 20, 2020 |
Kobojunkie:"9Pray like this: Our Father in heaven, may Your name be kept holy. 10May Your Kingdom come soon. May Your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven." - Matthew 6:9-10 "Father," He said, "if You will, take this cup of suffering away from Me. Not My will, however, but Your will be done."" - Luke 22:42 Action speaks louder than word. Leading, by example, is the most powerful advice you can give to anyone. Your deeds and/or action, without saying or verbalising, is the most powerful advice you can give your followers, lmao Kobojunkie:Context is King. Please unlearn, without having just cause, quoting scripture in isolation, because you'll unwittingly, slide into reading in pretext the bible text, since you are not reading the Bible text contextually. Ephesus was a young, upcoming and growing early believers place to live in then, with all sorts of teething things going on, so when Ephesians chapter 6 is contextually read what do you see in chapter as the reason(s), why Apostle Paul advised to pray in the Spirit, hmm? |
| Re: I Should Speak In Tongues, Right? by Kobojunkie: 8:06am On May 20, 2020 |
MuttleyLaff:If Paul meant to say "pray the will of God", I believe he would have simply said that. I asked to be taught what it meant to pray in the Spirit just yesterday, and what came out were the groanings, so I think I will stick with that as the meaning for a bit longer. Jesus didn't say anything about groanings, but He did speak of how the Spirit of God will lead us into all truths. MuttleyLaff:Given that the Holy Spirit, who we received after Jesus died, is the seal of the Covenant we have in Christ, I think it is safe to assume that Jesus didn't need to groan or pray in the Spirit to show us how it had to be done. The Spirit of God after all is our teacher and our guide through this Christian adventure. He is all capable afterall He is God Himself. MuttleyLaff:Still the message from Paul to the Ephesians was that they pray in the Spirit at all times. |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (20) (Reply)
Pastor E.A Adeboye's 2020 Prophecy (video) / Where Are All The Real Pastors? / SIX Extremely Ridiculous Beliefs Atheists Have And Their Simple Rebuttals
(Go Up)
| 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 Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 334 |