Speaking in Tongues (Privately, Outside of Church)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

shrume

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2017
2,193
448
83
No sir the authorial intent as the context means it to be. gifts made known to the fellowship in Corinthian church. spiritual matter if you prefer does not change the context that too would meet the authorial intent. but by it's self unclear .
This ^^^ is by itself not clear. What are you trying to say?

Which brings the other point "Gifts which you said Charisma means, which you also said It does not mean LOL.
I never said charisma does not mean "gifts". I did say pneumatikos does not mean "gifts", and it does not.

Even if the PASSAGE SAY IT 4 TIMES IN CHAPTER 12. the Normative has been established . proper exegesis would help you see this clearly.
Methinks you're trying to sound like you know what you're talking about, but don't.

Have a nice day :)
You too!
 

CS1

Moderator
Staff member
May 23, 2012
2,781
310
83
CS1 –
so you change the word of God where it says very plainly in chapter 12 of 1cor " Now concerning spiritual gifts".

I have it as “peri de tôn pneumatikôn – “concerning moreover spiritual [things/matters]….”

The word ‘gift’ is not used here, nor is it necessarily implied.

I was going to try and get into some detail, but I think Shrume has summed it up quite nicely. I know we do not agree on some aspects of “tongues”, but the summation and analogy with the lightbulb are spot on.

The word used translates to "spiritual things" - It's hard not to read things into the text, but "gift" just isn't there.

as far as welcome documentation As I said there are .however, those that prove tongues is a real language or those that do not can not change the context of the word of God . Clearly you did not see two of my location which did offer you proof.

If you copied any links, etc., I did not see them.

Faking tongues may be what you did

I’m not Pentecostal nor Charismatic so do not use glossolalia in the Christian sense, though admittedly, I do play a lot with language just to see what I can come up with for sounds, styles of speech and whatnot. I have no doubt that in some circles, what I am doing would be construed as speaking in tongues.

In trying to find any links you posted, I noticed that in one of your posts, you mention that you have asked some linguists or a linguist in particular (?) to make up a language and they could not. Such languages do indeed exist and are called “constructed languages”, or “con-langs” for short. They are actually quite common. Typically their use is relegated to movies (Navi’i in the movie ‘Avatar’, or to go way back, Klingon in the “Star Trek” movies), but some are created with the intent to be artificial languages, replacing normal ones, to be used on an everyday basis where communication is an issue (Esperanto and Interlingua - neither of which really caught on - English is just too powerful and too widely used).

These are all real functioning languages which contain a specific set of sounds, grammar and word order. They are a popular pastime with many linguists, but not everyone can create them; they are, as you might suspect, rather time involved. Here’s a link to quite a number of con-langs that linguists (professional and non-professional alike) have created:

Conlangery - Omniglot forum

Unlike modern tongues, these languages must have a defined set of sounds, rules on how those sounds go together (i.e. what’s allowed for combinations and what’s not allowed), a specific grammar, and a specific syntax (word order). None of which modern tongues have. Many of these con-langs are not intended to be simple to learn; they are rather complex and just as difficult as any real language to learn (oftentimes something like, what if a Bantu language were crossed with a Slavic one? type of deal, but again, unlike tongues, they are real language (though not spoken by “ethnic/native speakers”).

again one word in it's self cannot bring the full context to three chapters in 1cor . I'm not a star track fan so I like to stay in the authorial intent of the chapters given as they speak of them. The information I posted in a thread it's there. again I do not care nor use the context of a Linguist to explain anything pertaining to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit in 1cor chapters 12, 13 and 14. I do not coin the terms t-speaking or modern tongues . the " con-langs that linguists (professional and non-professional alike) have created: how long did it take them to do this?

years ? days , weeks , months ? because it did not take the Holy Spirit to use a linguists to validate what is or was manifested in 1cor 12, 13 and 14 or in the Book of Acts :).
 

CS1

Moderator
Staff member
May 23, 2012
2,781
310
83
This ^^^ is by itself not clear. What are you trying to say?


I never said charisma does not mean "gifts". I did say pneumatikos does not mean "gifts", and it does not.


Methinks you're trying to sound like you know what you're talking about, but don't.


You too!
Ok then were done :)
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
reneweddaybyday -

You are incorrect if you believe "there's more than one way to interpret any given text". That understanding of Scripture results from the lie of the wicked one "did God really say?".

Not every Christian denomination interprets a given Biblical text the same way. If there were only one way, there’d only be one Christian denomination in the world today; not hundreds. A good place to start would be with ‘flioque’.

And 1 Cor 12:1 tells us Paul is addressing spiritual matters of which Paul does not want the church ignorant. So this section of Scripture is dealing with spiritual issues.

Yes, this section does indeed address spiritual matters, but spiritual matters do not automatically equate with something ‘supernatural’.

Do you agree there are some believers today who do speak in tongues and it is the genuine manifestation of the Spirit as shown in 1 Cor 12?

I suppose it would depend on your interpretation of the manifestation of languages, so it’s kind of tough one to answer. With respect to language, any person who has a God-given ability to pick up foreign languages seemingly effortlessly can be said to have the “gift of tongues”. Just as anyone who has exceptionally keen insight may be said to have the “gift of prophecy”, a village/tribal elder steeped in knowledge, wisdom and lore, the “gift of wisdom”, etc.

So too could a person using a foreign language to administer to non-English speaking members of a congregation – perhaps stuck and struggling, not sure what or how to express a given topic, and draws on the H/S for inspiration, then suddenly starts speaking on the topic for an hour, very confident in what they’re saying. I would argue that this could also certainly be interpreted as the “gift of tongues”.

And what about the audience as shown in 1 Cor 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

This describes a real language situation – a continuation of the first part. If a person is speaking a foreign language in a public gathering and no one else speaks it, and no translator can be found, Paul admonishes the person to pray silently to himself (to God) so as not to cause disruption in the service.

Please provide the Scriptural reference which indicates the speakers understand what they are saying. Thanks.

Just take any example you want of a situation where foreign languages (“tongues”) are being spoken – Corinthians, Acts, they all fit the bill. It’s the speaker’s native language; the people hearing/listening are the ones who don’t understand what s/he is saying.
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
it did not take the Holy Spirit to use a linguists to validate what is or was manifested in 1cor 12, 13 and 14 or in the Book of Acts

No it doesn’t. Anyone can read the texts and insert the word “language(s)” for the more archaic “tongue(s)” and even with just doing something as simple as that, the texts take on a whole different tone/meaning.
 

UnderGrace

Senior Member
May 8, 2016
3,604
385
83
Exactly true!!


it did not take the Holy Spirit to use a linguists to validate what is or was manifested in 1cor 12, 13 and 14 or in the Book of Acts

No it doesn’t. Anyone can read the texts and insert the word “language(s)” for the more archaic “tongue(s)” and even with just doing something as simple as that, the texts take on a whole different tone/meaning.
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,136
267
83
You are incorrect if you believe "there's more than one way to interpret any given text". That understanding of Scripture results from the lie of the wicked one "did God really say?".

Not every Christian denomination interprets a given Biblical text the same way. If there were only one way, there’d only be one Christian denomination in the world today; not hundreds. A good place to start would be with ‘flioque’.
Actually, the best place to start is with God and understanding His intent when it comes to interpretation of Scripture and His intent concerning the church.

According to God, there is one body of which the born again believer is a member in particular. The one body is to submit to the One Head (the Lord Jesus Christ).

The fact that there are many denominations does not mean that God does not see us as one body:

Romans 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

See also Ephesians 4:4 There is one body ...


We are not to lay blame for man's inability to conform to God's intent at God's feet. We are the problem when it comes to the various denominations, not Him.




Kavik said:
And 1 Cor 12:1 tells us Paul is addressing spiritual matters of which Paul does not want the church ignorant. So this section of Scripture is dealing with spiritual issues.

Yes, this section does indeed address spiritual matters, but spiritual matters do not automatically equate with something ‘supernatural’.
When the Spirit gives the utterance, the Spirit gives the utterance. What you call 'supernatural', I refer to as the manifestation of the Spirit as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.




Kavik said:
Do you agree there are some believers today who do speak in tongues and it is the genuine manifestation of the Spirit as shown in 1 Cor 12?

I suppose it would depend on your interpretation of the manifestation of languages, so it’s kind of tough one to answer.
Not tough to answer at all.

Do you believe the manifestation of kinds of tongues is currently worked in the life of the believer in our day and time?

A simple "yes" or "no" will do.




Kavik said:
With respect to language, any person who has a God-given ability to pick up foreign languages seemingly effortlessly can be said to have the “gift of tongues”. Just as anyone who has exceptionally keen insight may be said to have the “gift of prophecy”, a village/tribal elder steeped in knowledge, wisdom and lore, the “gift of wisdom”, etc.
You describe certain natural talents which are inherent in a person or learned through the course of a person's life. You do not describe the manifestation of the Spirit shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.




Kavik said:
So too could a person using a foreign language to administer to non-English speaking members of a congregation – perhaps stuck and struggling, not sure what or how to express a given topic, and draws on the H/S for inspiration, then suddenly starts speaking on the topic for an hour, very confident in what they’re saying. I would argue that this could also certainly be interpreted as the “gift of tongues”.
There is a difference between the manifestation of tongues and the H/S inspiring a person who is speaking in a congregation. That you do not understand (or will not acknowledge) the difference does not mean the manifestation is not as I (and others) have stated repeatedly over the pages of this thread.




Kavik said:
And what about the audience as shown in 1 Cor 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

This describes a real language situation – a continuation of the first part. If a person is speaking a foreign language in a public gathering and no one else speaks it, and no translator can be found, Paul admonishes the person to pray silently to himself (to God) so as not to cause disruption in the service.
Since, as you point out, the person is to (bold mine) "pray silently to himself (to God)" why do you claim that the only purpose of the manifestation of tongues is to communicate with others who do not speak the same language as the person who speaks in tongues?


In the case of 1 Cor 14:28, it is clear the person is speaking in tongues to God only.

Not the church congregation as you continue to insist is the purpose of the manifestation of kinds of tongues.




Kavik said:
Please provide the Scriptural reference which indicates the speakers understand what they are saying. Thanks.

Just take any example you want of a situation where foreign languages (“tongues”) are being spoken – Corinthians, Acts, they all fit the bill. It’s the speaker’s native language; the people hearing/listening are the ones who don’t understand what s/he is saying.
I am asking you for Scriptural proof (i.e. Chapter and Verse) to support your claim that the speaker understands what he/she is saying.

Here is your statement (from Post #577):

absolutely nowhere is it even remotely suggested that the speakers do not understand what they are saying

Please provide Chapter and Verse which supports your assertion that the speaker understands what he/she is saying. Thank you.
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
Romans 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

See also Ephesians 4:4 There is one body ...

We are not to lay blame for man's inability to conform to God's intent at God's feet. We are the problem when it comes to the various denominations, not Him.

Yes, in the broadest sense, all people who follow the message/way of life that Jesus put forth and demonstrated can be called ‘Christian’ – in that sense, all are ‘one body’. The actual texts of the Bible however, are still interpreted many different ways; and yes, it’s man’s doing, not God’s.

What you call 'supernatural', I refer to as the manifestation of the Spirit as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.

I don’t think I’m calling anything supernatural – just the opposite; manifestations of the Spirit do not have to automatically equate with something supernatural; they can be things that are quite natural.

Do you believe the manifestation of kinds of tongues is currently worked in the life of the believer in our day and time?

‘Kinds of tongues’ – literally: “kinds (in the sense of ‘families’ – Gk. genos) of languages”

There is no simple ‘yes/no’ answer – the answer depends on one’s interpretation/understanding of the text.

Is one of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit the ability to learn/speak various related languages with ease? I would have to say, yes. Does one need to be born again to have this ability bestowed upon him/her? No, absolutely not.

You describe certain natural talents which are inherent in a person or learned through the course of a person's life. You do not describe the manifestation of the Spirit shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.

Where do you think these, what we call, ‘natural talents’ come from? They can certainly be considered manifestations of the Spirit/a ‘gift from God’.

In the case of 1 Cor 14:28, it is clear the person is speaking in tongues to God only.

Yes, he is speaking his native language to God only since if he were to speak aloud, no one else around him would understand a word he’s saying (as none there speak his language). Rather than cause confusion and disruption at the public worship; Paul admonishes him to pray silently to himself.

Since, as you point out, the person is to (bold mine) "pray silently to himself (to God)" why do you claim that the only purpose of the manifestation of tongues is to communicate with others who do not speak the same language as the person who speaks in tongues?

I don’t think I’m saying that- the manifestation of tongues is simply the ability to learn/speak various foreign languages much more easily than others. A ‘God-given natural talent/propensity’ for languages. What you’re describing in the second half above, if I’m understanding correctly, sounds like translation. To assist in translation services for non-English speakers (whatever the setting or circumstances) is just one example of how a person may choose to use this ability.

Please provide Chapter and Verse which supports your assertion that the speaker understands what he/she is saying. Thank you.

Again, take any chapter and verse you wish where a person is speaking a language (‘tongue’). The Pentecostal narrative, any section of Corinthians that describe a person speaking a ‘language’. In all examples (except Acts), the person is just speaking their native language which others do not understand. In Acts, it’s speaking in the two vernacular languages of the Jews rather than the expected (one) prescribed ‘holy language’ of Judaism (Hebrew).

To a tongues-speaker, any given Biblical passage describing ‘tongues’ can only be interpreted as to assert that the speaker doesn’t understand what he’s saying. Any other explanation negates modern tongues.

What’s being produced today needs explanation in the narrative of Scripture – i.e. trying to make sense of the experience of modern tongues in light of the narrative of Scripture. Speakers attempt to ‘justify’ or ‘prove the validity’ of modern tongues by placing them in Biblical context.

For modern tongues however, a Biblical context simply does not exist as Biblical tongues are nothing more than various real languages.
 

loveme1

Senior Member
Oct 30, 2011
8,007
131
63
You can be gifted with tongues if needed...

You can also talk without purpose out loud and another interpret for you..

With all the different languages the gift was for unbelievers to hear in their tongue and marvel and Believe..


I ask is there anyone here that was filled with the ability to talk in a recognised language and natives attest to etc?
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
With all the different languages the gift was for unbelievers to hear in their tongue and marvel and Believe..

Yes, to hear the message in their own language(s) rather than in some prescribed one they did not speak (as in the Pentecostal narrative) - something, which at that time, as silly and as obvious a solution as it sounds today, was a completely new and unheard of concept. Obviously it worked!

I ask is there anyone here that was filled with the ability to talk in a recognised language and natives attest to etc?

Alas, there are no proven cases of xenoglossy - anywhere. Even the most well known and studied cases have been dis-proven. Yet despite this, there are many anecdotal reports of this happening within the Pentecostal/Charismatic community. Some have achieved a virtual 'urban legend' status. Tongue's coming out as Hebrew or Aramaic and being recognized as such by some Jewish person in the audience is perhaps the most well known example.
 

loveme1

Senior Member
Oct 30, 2011
8,007
131
63
With all the different languages the gift was for unbelievers to hear in their tongue and marvel and Believe..

Yes, to hear the message in their own language(s) rather than in some prescribed one they did not speak (as in the Pentecostal narrative) - something, which at that time, as silly and as obvious a solution as it sounds today, was a completely new and unheard of concept. Obviously it worked!

I ask is there anyone here that was filled with the ability to talk in a recognised language and natives attest to etc?

Alas, there are no proven cases of xenoglossy - anywhere. Even the most well known and studied cases have been dis-proven. Yet despite this, there are many anecdotal reports of this happening within the Pentecostal/Charismatic community. Some have achieved a virtual 'urban legend' status. Tongue's coming out as Hebrew or Aramaic and being recognized as such by some Jewish person in the audience is perhaps the most well known example.

Interesting isn't it.... I wonder if anyone here will come forward..
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
As I mentioned on another thread, there have been hundreds of examples of tongues-speech which have been documented, recorded and transcribed from all over the world; not one was ever found to be a real language.
 

unobtrusive

Senior Member
Jul 23, 2017
916
24
18
As I mentioned on another thread, there have been hundreds of examples of tongues-speech which have been documented, recorded and transcribed from all over the world; not one was ever found to be a real language.
.....Why not?
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,136
267
83
Romans 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

See also Ephesians 4:4 There is one body ...

We are not to lay blame for man's inability to conform to God's intent at God's feet. We are the problem when it comes to the various denominations, not Him.


Yes, in the broadest sense, all people who follow the message/way of life that Jesus put forth and demonstrated can be called ‘Christian’ – in that sense, all are ‘one body’. The actual texts of the Bible however, are still interpreted many different ways; and yes, it’s man’s doing, not God’s.
So we are in agreement concerning God's desire and intent that we function as one body.

God even goes so far as to state that we are to be of one mind (2 Cor 13:11; Philippians 1:27, 2:2; 1 Peter 3:8). Wouldn't that be something? :cool:




Kavik said:
What you call 'supernatural', I refer to as the manifestation of the Spirit as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.

I don’t think I’m calling anything supernatural – just the opposite; manifestations of the Spirit do not have to automatically equate with something supernatural; they can be things that are quite natural.
The manifestation of the Spirit originates in the spiritual realm and is evidenced (manifested) in the physical when the One and the selfsame Spirit works within the believer. The Spirit gives the utterance. The believer speaks the words revealed to him/her by the One and the selfsame Spirit.

According to Mirriam-Webster, the manifestation of the Spirit is considered 'supernatural':

"Of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe;

Departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature."​

Collins Dictionary defines 'supernatural' as follows:

"Existing or occurring outside the normal experience or knowledge of man; not explainable by the known forces or laws of nature; specif., of, involving, or attributed to God ..."​

It appears the manifestation of the Spirit is, in fact, what you term "supernatural".




Kavik said:
Do you believe the manifestation of kinds of tongues is currently worked in the life of the believer in our day and time?

‘Kinds of tongues’ – literally: “kinds (in the sense of ‘families’ – Gk. genos) of languages”
In agreement that the word "kinds" is the translated from the Greek word genos.

Applying that to the manifestation of tongues, genos is spiritual in nature. You cannot place that which originates in the spiritual realm under a microscope in order to scrutinize, examine, and analyze it. The carnal understanding of spiritual matters fails due to the limitations of the physical to comprehend the spiritual.




Kavik said:
There is no simple ‘yes/no’ answer – the answer depends on one’s interpretation/understanding of the text.

Is one of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit the ability to learn/speak various related languages with ease? I would have to say, yes. Does one need to be born again to have this ability bestowed upon him/her? No, absolutely not.
Wrong on both counts.

The manifestation of kinds of tongues is not "the ability to learn/speak various related languages with ease".

The manifestation of kinds of tongues results from the One and the selfsame Spirit working within the born again believer to bring about the manifestation. The manifestation is then evidenced/revealed in the physical realm as the believer speaks the words revealed to him/her by the One and the selfsame Spirit.

And, yes, the One and the selfsame Spirit works within those who are born again to bring about the manifestation of the Spirit.




Kavik said:
You describe certain natural talents which are inherent in a person or learned through the course of a person's life. You do not describe the manifestation of the Spirit shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10.

Where do you think these, what we call, ‘natural talents’ come from? They can certainly be considered manifestations of the Spirit/a ‘gift from God’.
Having an inherent 'natural talent' is not the same as the manifestation of the Spirit.

There are many 'natural talents' which are not the manifestation of the Spirit.

To mistake 'natural talents' with the manifestation of the Spirit results in error.




Kavik said:
In the case of 1 Cor 14:28, it is clear the person is speaking in tongues to God only.

Yes, he is speaking his native language to God only since if he were to speak aloud, no one else around him would understand a word he’s saying (as none there speak his language). Rather than cause confusion and disruption at the public worship; Paul admonishes him to pray silently to himself.
So then you agree that when a person speaks in tongues silently to God, he/she is praying?

1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth




Kavik said:
Since, as you point out, the person is to (bold mine) "pray silently to himself (to God)" why do you claim that the only purpose of the manifestation of tongues is to communicate with others who do not speak the same language as the person who speaks in tongues?

I don’t think I’m saying that- the manifestation of tongues is simply the ability to learn/speak various foreign languages much more easily than others. A ‘God-given natural talent/propensity’ for languages. What you’re describing in the second half above, if I’m understanding correctly, sounds like translation. To assist in translation services for non-English speakers (whatever the setting or circumstances) is just one example of how a person may choose to use this ability.
I do not believe you understand the manifestation of the Spirit.

On the one hand, you claim the manifestation of kinds of tongues is used when a person goes into an area in which he or she is a foreigner. He/She then speaks in tongues in order to communicate with those who do not understand his/her native language.

If that is the correct understanding of the manifestation of kinds of tongues, there would be no need for the manifestation of interpretation of tongues.

Perhaps, the manifestation of kinds of tongues is just as it has been explained to you by me and others over the pages of this thread. The manifestation of kinds of tongues is utilized in the public congregation and is spoken out loud so that all may hear and it is followed by the manifestation of interpretation of tongues so that all understand what was just spoken in tongues. The result is edification of the church (1 Cor 14:5).

In the public congregational setting, when the manifestation of interpretation of tongues does not follow the manifestation of kinds of tongues, the believer is to speak in tongues silently to God (1 Cor 14:28).





Kavik said:
What’s being produced today needs explanation in the narrative of Scripture – i.e. trying to make sense of the experience of modern tongues in light of the narrative of Scripture. Speakers attempt to ‘justify’ or ‘prove the validity’ of modern tongues by placing them in Biblical context.

For modern tongues however, a Biblical context simply does not exist as Biblical tongues are nothing more than various real languages.
I have provided the Biblical context for Biblical tongues several times in this thread.

The manifestation of kinds of tongues results from the One and the selfsame Spirit working within the born again believer to bring about the manifestation. The manifestation is then evidenced/revealed in the physical realm as the believer speaks the words revealed to him/her by the One and the selfsame Spirit. The Spirit gives the utterance. The speaker speaks the words as revealed to him/her.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
12,112
748
113
As I mentioned on another thread, there have been hundreds of examples of tongues-speech which have been documented, recorded and transcribed from all over the world; not one was ever found to be a real language.
As a non Christian this will mean absolutely nothing to you in eternity.

The only issue you must face is what you will do with the blood of Christ and what He will do with you.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
Unobtrusive –

.....Why not?

A good question, but unfortunately a rather long answer if you want all the gory details ;)

Here’s the real short version…

The quickest answer as to why no examples have been found to be real languages is because what modern tongues-speakers are producing is not language; it is non-cognitive non-language utterance (glossolalia).

The question that may naturally arise from this, and perhaps a better question as to why no modern tongues have never been found to be a real language, is “Why is modern tongues not language?”.

Whether spoken somewhere on planet earth, some alien world, or in the spirit realm, in order for something to be language, at its most basic level, it must consist of at least two elements: (1) discrete units of various sorts, and (2) rules and principles that govern the way these discrete units can be combined and ordered.

Glossolalia/modern tongues contains neither one of these.

Some people are quick to tell me that I am trying to ‘explain/understand the spiritual in earthly terms’, or something along those lines. The gist of the argument is something along the lines of “tongues, being a ‘heavenly’ language, do not need to have all these things you say language must have; it’s a “heavenly language” after all, and does not need to be bound by any human definitions of language. Thus, you’re trying to analyze something spiritual/supernatural in earthly terms.”

The two basic elements described further above however, are, as alluded to, universal; there’s just no getting around it – no matter where something is spoken, if you utter a string of sounds and want to call it ‘language’, those sounds must have some type of structure which define it and assign it meaning, otherwise it’s simply free vocalization; non-cognitive non-language utterances (NC-NLU’s) – the best working and, I think, the most accurate description of modern T-speech.

If you’d like the longer version which goes into all the detail, I can certainly post it.
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
290
10
18
The manifestation of kinds of tongues results from the One and the selfsame Spirit working within the born again believer to bring about the manifestation. The manifestation is then evidenced/revealed in the physical realm as the believer speaks the words revealed to him/her by the One and the selfsame Spirit. The Spirit gives the utterance. The speaker speaks the words as revealed to him/her.

Or, as it was presented on a particular site…..

“The manifestation of speaking in tongues is your operation of the God-given ability whereby you may (at any time in your private prayer life or in a believers meeting, if interpreted) show forth, by speaking in a language unknown to you, the external manifestation in the senses world of the internal presence and power of the gift of holy spirit.”

Said language, according to what Biblical texts indicate, is a real language; just one you’ve never learned.

The problem with the above is that modern tongues are not real language as evidenced by the hundreds that have been recorded and/or transcribed. Not one has ever been found to a real language.

Hence the need to explain what exactly people are doing, since real language sure isn’t it - the conclusion; you can also have a ‘private prayer language’ which, very conveniently, does not have to be a real language.

I think I’d rather stick with the idea that the manifestation of languages is just the God-given (natural) ability to learn languages, having a “knack” for languages. Yes, there are many natural abilities that do not fall into the 9 specific ones referenced; however, the ones referenced, in addition to their many other uses, are ones that specifically could/can build up a church and thus, when used for such, may be said to be manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,136
267
83
Said language, according to what Biblical texts indicate, is a real language; just one you’ve never learned.

The problem with the above is that modern tongues are not real language as evidenced by the hundreds that have been recorded and/or transcribed. Not one has ever been found to a real language.
You cannot prove with 100% certainty that the manifestation of kinds of tongues as utilized in the records in Acts are not the same as what is taking place today.

On Day of Pentecost there were some who heard and claimed that those who were speaking in tongues were full of new wine (drunk) – Acts 2:13.

So we are always going to have people who downgrade the manifestation to something not intended by God in order to explain away what is actually occurring.

Your belief that the manifestation of kinds of tongues is some sort of NC-NLU, or a shaman's chant, or a "not real language" does not change the manifestation into what you claim. The manifestation is the manifestation whether you believe it or not.




Kavik said:
Hence the need to explain what exactly people are doing, since real language sure isn’t it - the conclusion; you can also have a ‘private prayer language’ which, very conveniently, does not have to be a real language.
Your insistence that the manifestation is some sort of "natural ability" reminds me of a documentary I once watched. The documentary tried to explain what occurred at the time the children of Israel left Egypt and crossed the Red Sea.

It was explained that the parting of the sea was nothing more than a natural occurring wind which came up and moved the waters so that dry land appeared.

So what occurred way back in Exodus 14? Was it a natural occurring wind which moved the waters so that a land bridge formed? Or did God part the seas for the children of Israel?

To some, it really does not matter what God does ... some people will not believe even when God raises His only begotten Son from the dead.




Kavik said:
I think I’d rather stick with the idea that the manifestation of languages is just the God-given (natural) ability to learn languages, having a “knack” for languages. Yes, there are many natural abilities that do not fall into the 9 specific ones referenced; however, the ones referenced, in addition to their many other uses, are ones that specifically could/can build up a church and thus, when used for such, may be said to be manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
The manifestation shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10 is not the "natural abilities" inherent within each and every person. We all have "natural abilities" which are beneficial to the body of Christ and which we are to utilize to bless others.

And Scripture tells us we also have the manifestation of word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, kinds of tongues, interpretation of tongues (1 Cor 12:8-10).

The manifestation of kinds of tongues is not an inherent natural ability to "learn languages". The manifestation is the working by the One and the selfsame Spirit within the life of the born again believer. The manifestation originates in the spiritual realm and is manifested (revealed) in the physical realm in the life of the believer. The Spirit gives the utterance (Acts 2:4). The words are spoken by the person in whom the Spirit is working.
 
Last edited:

BenFTW

Senior Member
Oct 7, 2012
4,055
313
83
28

You cannot prove with 100% certainty that the manifestation of kinds of tongues as utilized in the records in Acts are not the same as what is taking place today.

On Day of Pentecost there were some who heard and claimed that those who were speaking in tongues were full of new wine (drunk) – Acts 2:13.

So we are always going to have people who downgrade the manifestation to something not intended by God in order to explain away what is actually occurring.

Your belief that the manifestation of kinds of tongues is some sort of NC-NLU, or a shaman's chant, or a "not real language" does not change the manifestation into what you claim. The manifestation is the manifestation whether you believe it or not.





Your insistence that the manifestation is some sort of "natural ability" reminds me of a documentary I once watched. The documentary tried to explain what occurred at the time the children of Israel left Egypt and crossed the Red Sea.

It was explained that the parting of the sea was nothing more than a natural occurring wind which came up and moved the waters so that dry land appeared.

So what occurred way back in Exodus 14? Was it a natural occurring wind which moved the waters so that a land bridge formed? Or did God part the seas for the children of Israel?

To some, it really does not matter what God does ... some people will not believe even when God raises His only begotten Son from the dead.





The manifestation shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10 is not the "natural abilities" inherent within each and every person. We all have "natural abilities" which are beneficial to the body of Christ and which we are to utilize to bless others.

And Scripture tells us we also have the manifestation of word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, kinds of tongues, interpretation of tongues (1 Cor 12:8-10).

The manifestation of kinds of tongues is not an inherent natural ability to "learn languages". The manifestation is the working by the One and the selfsame Spirit within the life of the born again believer. The manifestation originates in the spiritual realm and is manifested (revealed) in the physical realm in the life of the believer. The Spirit gives the utterance (Acts 2:4). The words are spoken by the person in whom the Spirit is working.
I don't think you can break it down any further or go into any more detail. It may be falling on deaf ears, but hopefully, to those that are open it will be well received. You make a solid, biblical, case and for one to attempt to refute what you have put forth would be bias and not exegesis.
 

BenFTW

Senior Member
Oct 7, 2012
4,055
313
83
28
As I mentioned on another thread, there have been hundreds of examples of tongues-speech which have been documented, recorded and transcribed from all over the world; not one was ever found to be a real language.
Interesting isn't it.... I wonder if anyone here will come forward..
Why is it that you two put forth a challenge for believers to speak in tongues at your command, which in fact, it is the Spirit giving the utterance unto our spirit? How audacious, wouldn't you consider it to be? This is likened to you practically saying, "Spirit give them words so that I may see if your gift is genuine." Believers do not seek, nor do they need, your validation.