Speaking in tongues

  • 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.

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
11,767
1,051
113
"By his time, the gift of tongues had died out."

Still fallacious. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

A consistent biblical exegesis of this situation would include an explanation of "the perfect" which was to come, what it was, and how it made a big difference in the Church. In the absence of such testimony, the message must be a cautious "We're not seeing that gift presently" rather than a certain "It has died out."

If prophesy was still active, then tongues had likely not ceased either, though they may not have been manifest. Scripture links the two, together with "knowledge" and their juxtaposition suggests that they will cease at the same time.
Not prophecy alone but new prophecy

New prophecy or revelations has ceased and right along with it new knowledge that could come with it. The existing prophecy will go on doing its work of prophesying the gospel until the new heavens and earth appear.

Is there something missing from the perfect or is the last chapter revelation with a warning not to add or substract, not the last and we can expect more or different laws so we can hear the word of God more perfectly??
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
4,524
290
83
THE perfect are the scriptures. I have great information on that also.
(the perfect is not a person because it is not capitalized which it would be particularly if it referred to Jesus Christ.)
It was capitalized in the Greek.

And so was everything else.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
11,294
5,706
113
Is there something missing from the perfect or is the last chapter revelation with a warning not to add or substract, not the last and we can expect more or different laws so we can hear the word of God more perfectly??
Why, Garee? Why?

You keep on asking this question, as though someone has is claiming repeatedly that we can hear God more perfectly, or know Him more perfectly, or some other drivel. NOBODY has made such claims.

Please STOP arguing against assertions that NOBODY is making. It's a waste of time and effort.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
4,524
290
83
@presidente
Yes, there were a lot of local languages; however, along the eastern Mediterranean basin, by the first century AD, most were in various stages of being replaced by Greek. Greek was by far the more common language spoken in the larger cities, with local languages typically being limited to rural areas. Jews living in those lands (i.e. the Western Diaspora) tended to cluster in large cities, not the rural countryside.
That does seem likely. But to assume that there was no trilingualism among Jews or bingualism among Jews who visited Jerusalem who knew Greek and some other language but not Hebrew or Aramaic is a huge leap. Even in pre-Industrial times, there were people from villages ending up in cities. I have read a source that argued that many languages were spoken in Corinth.

Just from the records we have, we know that there were a number of languages besides Greek, Latin, Aramaic, and Hebrew spoken throughout the empire. They did not have professional linguists and modern missionaries from Wycliff going around and trying to get every language documented in IPA and developing a new alphabet for every language, and it is likely that not everything that was written on papyrus or parchment survived, especially in the wetter climates. So there may have been many languages and especially dialects that are unattested. If they weren't used for trade or academia, why would the writings have survived.

I have also read about one out of every 8 people in the Roman Empire was Jewish in the first century. I believe that theory was mentioned in Michael Green's Evangelism in the Early Church. Some Jews were active at proselytizing.

Acts 2 is actually evidence that there were Jews in the diaspora who knew many languages, if we read it in a straightforward intuitive manner as readers of Greek in the centuries following it's writing also did.

Mark Janse's "Aspects of Bilingualism in the History of the Greek Language" specifically focuses part of its discussion around the central Asia area (where Galatia is/was).

He notes Hellenization was accelerated before, and then reinforced by, the "Roman annexation (17 AD)". The process was slower in the "rural areas," which maintained indigenous languages. This implies two things – (1) the rural areas became more bilingual (retaining indigenous languages), which also implies the cities moved away from those languages to Greek. Both city and countryside had varying levels of bilingual use, because regarding the regions around Galatia, "most of them are known to be bilingual in the first century AD".[/quote[

This is good if he has evidence of bilingualism. But if he has no evidence for a Celtic Galatian language surviving to a certain period of time, that is not evidence. It is an empty space in history. One could fill in the empty space there with a hypothesis that everyone there just spoke Greek, but that is not evidence of anything.

So again, we’re kind of in this “in-between” stage seen in language assimilation where the larger cities (where Paul likely preached) were Greek speaking (or, worse case, possibly bilingual), but the more rural areas still retained the language.
The South Galatian theory makes a lot more sense, that these were inhabitants of the province of South Galatia.

It’s reasonable to conclude that the Galatians Paul had dealings with were Greek speakers (inhabitants of the larger cities, whether Greeks or Greek-speaking ethnic Galatians), not Galatian speakers (more rural villages/towns).
That is likely, but the idea that there was enough linguistic diversity and knowledge of foreign languages among the diaspora for a crowd of thousands of them gathered in Jerusalem for Sukkoth to recognize and 16 or so languages and dialects.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
4,524
290
83
GraceAndTruth citing a source presumably mentioned earlier in the thread.

Polycarp’s letter to the Philippians that those who “choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation,
can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth” (12). However, Polycarp nowhere
indicates that tongues are a part of the normal characterof Christianity; in fact, he does not even touch on the subject of tongues.
From these observations, it is clear that the silence of
the Apostolic Fathers cannot simply be dismissed asbeing of no consequence.
First of all, yes it can. If speaking in tongues was rare or not considered a gift Polycarp had to bring up in the middle of a discussion about somethign else, that doesn't prove the gift of the Spirit is not available.

Second, it is annoying that your author here argues falsely about the 'silence of the Apostolic fathers' so-called. Ireneaus DOES affirm speaking in tongues in his own time. If we supposed hypothetically that Polycarp and Justin Martyr actually had spoken in tongues themselves, couldn't they still have written everything they wrote? I am not saying that they did or did not. I am just pointing out that your author fills up space, but presents no evidence.

If he were arguing against a Oneness Pentecostal who thought you had to speak in tongues to be saved, he could have an argument based on silence, given the importance they put on speaking in tongues and the fact that these men had a different idea of what is involved in being saved from those Oneness folks, you might have an argument. But if you are arguing against the idea that Paul presents in I Corinthians 12, that tongues is among the gifts of the Spirit, and the idea that it is still available or was in the 2nd century, as the Spirit wills, he presents no case at all.

THE TESTIMONY OF JUSTIN MARTYR
Justin Martyr, who was born around A.D. 100 and wasmartyred somewhere between A.D. 163 and 167 (13),
traveled widely in the Roman Empire and should havecome into contact with the phenomena of speaking in
tongues. He was born in Samaria, converted in Ephesus, and traveled over the empire as a Christian teacher
(14). In spite of this extensive traveling and teaching,
Justin has nothing to say regarding the gift of tongues.
Your author is making a mistake here. Justin travelled and taught widely. We have a fragment of that teaching. If he taught through Acts or I Corinthians on some occasion, he may have shared his experiences and views on speaking in tongues in some venue. If he did, we do not have it in the body of literature attributed to Justin Martyr. We do not know if we did or not. Your author's method of arguing from pretend silence is tiresome.

I say pretend silence because we have already shown the quote from Ireneaus on the subject.

There is, however, one section in his work
Dialogue with Trypho which might give rise to the idea that Justin
knew of tongues. In arguing that the prophetical gifts ofthe Jews are now transferred to Christians, he says:
“For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to
the present time. And hence you ought to understand the[the gifts] formerly among your nation have been transf
erred to us”(15). However, Jackson remarks that “it
is not certain that speaking in tongues is here intended”(16). There are a number of things which support this
and make it almost certain that Justin did not have the gi
ft of tongues in mind. First, Justin statesthat the giftshe is speaking of were formerly among the people of Israel. This certainly would not apply to this gift for it
is only used in connection with the church (17). Second, when Justin speaks of gifts he mentions seven, but
the gift of tongues is not included (18). In light of thes
e facts it is very evident that Justin did not have the
gift of tongues in mind.
Just as the silence of the Apostolic Fathers was signifi
cant, so the silence of Justin Martyr is important,
especially in the light of certain facts. The fact that
Justin traveled widely yet makes no reference to tongues
would show that either he had never encountered the
phenomena or that he was unimpressed by the gift if he
did.
Your author presents no evidence, no argument about Justin's opinion of speaking in tongues. I believe in speaking in tongues, but if I had that conversation with Trypho that he did, I probably would not have brought them up either. I Corinthians 14 shows unbelievers responding to speaking in tongues by saying 'ye are mad.' Also, it is more likely that Trypho was familiar with the concept of prophets and prophecy, and it would have been more difficult and less effective for Justin to explain what speaking in tongues was and try to find a way to tie it in to Trypho's worldview. If the midrash was around that said that the children of Israel spoke in the 70 nations of the world at the giving of the Law (which was celebrated at Pentecost), there might have been a way to tie it in, but if that midrash was around back then, would a Hellenized Jew have been familiar with it, and could the argument have even been made sensibly from the Septuagint without the Hebrew text? It seems a stretch to get that from the Hebrew text, IMO.

The other problem here is that this is a non-cessationist quote from Justin Martyr. He was talking about the on-going functioning of the gift of prophecy.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
11,767
1,051
113
Why, Garee? Why?

You keep on asking this question, as though someone has is claiming repeatedly that we can hear God more perfectly, or know Him more perfectly, or some other drivel. NOBODY has made such claims.

Please STOP arguing against assertions that NOBODY is making. It's a waste of time and effort.
Someone is trying to confirm something as a sign is saying that tongues. "God brining prophecy in multiple languages and not Hebrews alone is still in effect" which would be new prophecy . Are you saying that they are claiming its drivel?

Not such thing as a sign gift. Signs are for those who believe not prophecy .Prophecy words easy to understand for those who do believe prophecy (no outward sign.)

2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
11,294
5,706
113
Someone is trying to confirm something as a sign is saying that tongues. "God brining prophecy in multiple languages and not Hebrews alone is still in effect" which would be new prophecy .
Someone? Which someone? Quote them!
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
11,294
5,706
113
So you read Greek too along with all those other ancient languages you know so wello_O? Koine or ?
One need not be able to read an ancient manuscript to see that it is written in "majuscule" text... all capital letters with no spaces.
 

GraceAndTruth

Junior Member
Sep 28, 2015
1,108
314
83
One need not be able to read an ancient manuscript to see that it is written in "majuscule" text... all capital letters with no spaces.
DINO, you are inserting yourself in posts that you are CLUELESS how they started. Nobody owes you any explanations. If you want to add to an established subject, at least go back and find the first mention. Garee is doing just fine without you badgering him.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
11,294
5,706
113
DINO, you are inserting yourself in posts that you are CLUELESS how they started. Nobody owes you any explanations. If you want to add to an established subject, at least go back and find the first mention. Garee is doing just fine without you badgering him.
Check your facts and take your own advice. I've been discussing this subject with Garee since the beginning of this thread, before you joined the site.
 

GraceAndTruth

Junior Member
Sep 28, 2015
1,108
314
83
First Corinthians 13:10 says, “When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (KJV). The “in part” or “partial” things are the sign gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues (verses 8–9). Perfect means “complete”—the incompleted scriptures at that time, will be completed.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
11,294
5,706
113
First Corinthians 13:10 says, “When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (KJV). The “in part” or “partial” things are the sign gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues (verses 8–9). Perfect means “complete”—the incompleted scriptures at that time, will be completed.
Once again, you haven't included any references to back up your assertion.

Scripture does not state that "the perfect" means "the completed canon of Scripture"... period. It's one of several interpretations... one that doesn't fit well with the context. Paul knew that prophecy was not limited to the authors of Scripture. He encouraged the Corinthian believers to "be eager to prophesy". It just doesn't follow that the Holy Spirit would lead Paul to write that, knowing it would only be valid for a couple of decades.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
4,524
290
83
DINO, you are inserting yourself in posts that you are CLUELESS how they started. Nobody owes you any explanations. If you want to add to an established subject, at least go back and find the first mention.
Biblical Greek was written in what is now all caps. Originally there was no distinction between upper and lower case. That was added later.

This is a discussion forum. Dino's comment makes perfect sense in context.

Why the snarky attitude all the time?
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
4,524
290
83
First Corinthians 13:10 says, “When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (KJV). The “in part” or “partial” things are the sign gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues (verses 8–9). Perfect means “complete”—the incompleted scriptures at that time, will be completed.
Btw, John Calvin called your interpretation stupid.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
4,304
1,675
113
Huh.
Well I have placed a certain person on ignore even though they speak english because their tongue is just nasty.
 

GraceAndTruth

Junior Member
Sep 28, 2015
1,108
314
83
Biblical Greek was written in what is now all caps. Originally there was no distinction between upper and lower case. That was added later.

This is a discussion forum. Dino's comment makes perfect sense in context.

Why the snarky attitude all the time?
Maybe you just read it as "snarky" Maybe I read your posts to Dino as 'snarky' Maybe we should stop trying to characterize people by posted words and not try to get in somoeone else's head . I'm going to fix that in myself right now. Peace.