The tongues that are...
- Thread starter GRACE_ambassador
- Start date
-
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.
“..."Unknown"? Is there really such a thing in God's Word Of Truth? “
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.”
John 4:24-26
“Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.”
John 18:37 KJV
“Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 8:31-32
“Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.”
James 1:18 KJV
“But ye have not so learned Christ; if so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: that ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
and be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.”
Ephesians 4:20-24 KJV
Sometimes we don’t want to hear the truth because someone told us it isn’t for us and to listen to them instead we prefer the fables
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
2 Timothy 4:3-4
abut the truth sets free
“in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.”
2 Timothy 2:25-26 KJV
some prefer the dungeon
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.”
John 4:24-26
“Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.”
John 18:37 KJV
“Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 8:31-32
“Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.”
James 1:18 KJV
“But ye have not so learned Christ; if so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: that ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
and be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.”
Ephesians 4:20-24 KJV
Sometimes we don’t want to hear the truth because someone told us it isn’t for us and to listen to them instead we prefer the fables
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
2 Timothy 4:3-4
abut the truth sets free
“in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.”
2 Timothy 2:25-26 KJV
some prefer the dungeon
Anyone who would accept what Alma White or Kavik has to offer.
Alma White is of the same cloth of Southern Baptist I grew up whom just hung a black man and turn around praising God for being OSAS.
In fact, read my attachment. It shows Alma supported the KKK and other Demonic Organizations.
Yeah, like she has any truth to add to Speaking in Tongues.
She's a feminist and racist and hated immigrants and hated Jews.
She and Kavik are of the SAME CLOTH!!
EVERYTHING BUT WHAT GOD IS!
Alma White is of the same cloth of Southern Baptist I grew up whom just hung a black man and turn around praising God for being OSAS.
In fact, read my attachment. It shows Alma supported the KKK and other Demonic Organizations.
Yeah, like she has any truth to add to Speaking in Tongues.
She's a feminist and racist and hated immigrants and hated Jews.
She and Kavik are of the SAME CLOTH!!
EVERYTHING BUT WHAT GOD IS!
Attachments
I don't believe White because I think she has good credentials. As I said, she was wrong about a lot of things. But what she says about Parham's failed missionary ventures is all part of the historical record; I knew about it before I ever heard of White. The same with Seymour and the Azusa St. revival. It wasn't until after the failure of Parham's missionaries that idea of angelic or heavenly tongues was adopted.
-
1
- Show all
Sure, obviously a "tongue" that you don't understand is an "unknown tongue". 1 Cor 14 is full of examples. That's why the gift of "Interpretation" was/IS important.
The "Gift of Tongues" is the same empowerment whether it's German, Sanskrit, or unclassified.
The tongues speaker does the same thing as the person who speaks Prophetic utterance. He/She simply speaks the words that the Holy Spirit puts into his/her mind. ALL Vocal gifts are the same in operation, and only vary by content.
Word of Knowledge, Interpretation of tongues, Tongues, Prophesy, etc. are all identical in operation for the one manifesting them.
Actually major Pentecostal / Charismatic groups don't teach that at all. True, lunatic fringe mavericks have taught all sorts of theological foolishness, with and without Kool-Aid as a chaser.
And, unless ALL Pentecostal Pastors, and missionaries are bald-faced liars, The exact thing still occurs today, according to HIS WILL.
EARLY Pentecostal Missionaries ignorantly went into the field THINKING that God would allow them to preach to people without learning the language. Pretty rapidly, they got their collective heinies handed to them, and retreated, realizing that God wasn't going to play THAT game.
SO - now we have language schools - Apparently God wanted His missionaries to associate socially with the folks they ministered to, and not just collect convert scalps to hang on their belts (figuratively). The Miraculous still happens, however.
And as a foot-note, by experience in many churches over 60 years or so, the TONGUE spoken in a meeting may or may not have a direct relationship to the Interpretation that follows - i.e. sometimes it seems to be more of a "Trumpet sound", as it were, to draw attention to the Interpretation which is what the Lord desires communicate -
Wrong! I have not added a "second work of Grace" please save your stereotyping with those of Oness or others as such.
I hold the teaching of the Trinity Concept, which I find to be Biblical. We teach and believe Jesus is Lord who died, was buried and rose again, and the only way to the Father and means of Eternal life.
We believed what Jesus said in Acts chapter 1:8. This is for those who are saved as the disciples were all saved Before the day of Pentacost, found in John chapter 20:22 when they were in the presence of the Resurrected Lord. Who said them after, Go and wait until you have received Power from on High found in Luke chapter 24:49.
I did not have to insult you or name-call try to stereotype you. If you disagree, provide your scriptural position or move on to another. Your opinion has been noted and unfounded with the word of God.
Thank you very much.
Is it “adding “ a work to believe what Jesus said to do and do it ? Or is that the actual definition of faith ?
were saved by grace through faith right ?
so let’s talk about faith is faith to believe “ I don’t need to do anything I’m saved by grace “
or is faith when you hear Gods word and believe what he’s saying and act in that belief ?
So an example is this a word of faith ? Should we believe this word ? Or does faith reject it as a work of the law ?
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Mark 16:15-16 KJV
if I heard this and believe it have I added in some work of man or the law of Moses ? Or is that where faith comes into me from ?
“But they have not all obeyed the gospel. ( why haven’t they obeyed the gospel )For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
Romans 10:16-17 KJV
when we try to resist the things Jesus said to do and well Be saved by saying “ that’s not grace “ we’re rejecting the source of faith
air is not a person adding a work when it’s what Jesus said will save them and they accept and believe it and th en of course tbey act because they believe what they heard from Jesus that’s just a hypergrace talking point to say tone other than Jesus is adding any works in he set forth salvstion d we’re supposed to hear about it and believe and act in that belief that is faith
noah was saved by grace through faith also he believed what God told him was going to happen and did what God said would save him
God decides to destroy all flesh and then
“But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.”
Genesis 6:8 KJV
noah didn’t add this in God said it and he believed it
“And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; ( he tells Him how to make the ark )
And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.
( Noah believed what God had told him so )
Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.”
Genesis 6:13-14, 17-18, 22 KJV
now how do we know for sure that Noah was saved by faith when he believed what God told him was going to happen and what to do ?
“By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house;
by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”
Hebrews 11:7 KJV
that’s the same righteousness oaul speaks about for us we have to hear Gods word and believe it like Noah did and then if we believe what he said it will lead us to do what we believe
Like baptism is a simple step of faith it’s not a work added by man it’s the word of God which creates faith
faith isn’t an excuse of why we now don’t need to hear what he said nd do what he said will save us and also avoid what he said will cause us to perish
sits the opposite fai th is when we believe what he said and follow it because we do believe in him we aren’t going to hen reject what he says will save our souls
faith without works is dead because it’s not coming from God and hearing his word of salvstion “ telling us what will save us who hear and believe “ faith is really simple
“he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; “
faith comes by hearing the gospel and believing his word spoken to those who believe the gospel it’s going tomlewd us to change what we do in life repent and start following his righteousness reversed in his doctrine
airs such a hindrance when hypergrace doctrine is spread that says in essence “ saved by grace only that means nothing else applies you don’t have to do anything Jesus said will save you it’s not for you you have faith already “
Ayer we’re steering them away from th e source of faith which is what God said will save a soul if we believe him
jesus set forth plenty of things for us to get busy learning and doing that’s walking in faith
were saved by grace through faith right ?
so let’s talk about faith is faith to believe “ I don’t need to do anything I’m saved by grace “
or is faith when you hear Gods word and believe what he’s saying and act in that belief ?
So an example is this a word of faith ? Should we believe this word ? Or does faith reject it as a work of the law ?
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Mark 16:15-16 KJV
if I heard this and believe it have I added in some work of man or the law of Moses ? Or is that where faith comes into me from ?
“But they have not all obeyed the gospel. ( why haven’t they obeyed the gospel )For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
Romans 10:16-17 KJV
when we try to resist the things Jesus said to do and well Be saved by saying “ that’s not grace “ we’re rejecting the source of faith
air is not a person adding a work when it’s what Jesus said will save them and they accept and believe it and th en of course tbey act because they believe what they heard from Jesus that’s just a hypergrace talking point to say tone other than Jesus is adding any works in he set forth salvstion d we’re supposed to hear about it and believe and act in that belief that is faith
noah was saved by grace through faith also he believed what God told him was going to happen and did what God said would save him
God decides to destroy all flesh and then
“But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.”
Genesis 6:8 KJV
noah didn’t add this in God said it and he believed it
“And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; ( he tells Him how to make the ark )
And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.
( Noah believed what God had told him so )
Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.”
Genesis 6:13-14, 17-18, 22 KJV
now how do we know for sure that Noah was saved by faith when he believed what God told him was going to happen and what to do ?
“By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house;
by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”
Hebrews 11:7 KJV
that’s the same righteousness oaul speaks about for us we have to hear Gods word and believe it like Noah did and then if we believe what he said it will lead us to do what we believe
Like baptism is a simple step of faith it’s not a work added by man it’s the word of God which creates faith
faith isn’t an excuse of why we now don’t need to hear what he said nd do what he said will save us and also avoid what he said will cause us to perish
sits the opposite fai th is when we believe what he said and follow it because we do believe in him we aren’t going to hen reject what he says will save our souls
faith without works is dead because it’s not coming from God and hearing his word of salvstion “ telling us what will save us who hear and believe “ faith is really simple
“he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; “
faith comes by hearing the gospel and believing his word spoken to those who believe the gospel it’s going tomlewd us to change what we do in life repent and start following his righteousness reversed in his doctrine
airs such a hindrance when hypergrace doctrine is spread that says in essence “ saved by grace only that means nothing else applies you don’t have to do anything Jesus said will save you it’s not for you you have faith already “
Ayer we’re steering them away from th e source of faith which is what God said will save a soul if we believe him
jesus set forth plenty of things for us to get busy learning and doing that’s walking in faith
Pentecostals teach a second and distinct work apart from the initial salvation experience. There is no second, or third, or fourth, or however many separate and distinct works you want to add. We are all baptized by one Spirit into one body, and that by faith in the Lord. Whether you call it a second work of grace or just a second work, the result is the same: it causes divisions by creating those who have a second experience and those who don't; and it denies the sufficiency of the finished work of Christ on the cross.
You can keep trying to obfuscate all you want, but these are the hard facts.
You can keep trying to obfuscate all you want, but these are the hard facts.
-
1
- Show all
Guess this needs to be done in two parts.
The Babel narrative is really quite fascinating from the perspective of historical linguistics in that it is one of very few ancient accounts of a people remembering (in a manner of speaking) the history of their language(s) - told of course in a religious context but remembered nonetheless.
To best understand this, a working definition of a few somewhat ambiguous terms must be defined.
Perhaps the most important term needing a more concise definition is (quote) “the whole world”. One must try and put into context and perspective the concept of what would have been considered “the whole world” to the original author(s) of the Babel narrative.
The answer is rather simple and straightforward: to a person or people living in what we know call the Middle East several thousand years ago, the "whole world" would have been just that; a small part of what we now call the Middle East.
The concept of a larger world existing beyond the lands these people inhabited (and those they were already familiar with) just didn’t exist. Their entire ‘world’ was confined to a relatively small area of the Levant. It is quite possible that lands even on the far borders of the Mediterranean were completely unknown to them.
The same holds true for the expression (quote) “all mankind”. Again, this term was confined to only the known people, tribes and nations encompassing their ‘world’.
So to summarize, in taking the narrative into historical context, the expressions “the whole world” and “all of mankind” must be understood to refer to a very small part and population of what we today call the Middle East.
Was there or could there indeed have been a common language spoken by (quote/unquote) “all mankind”?! From the point of historical linguistics, this is certainly an intriguing question!
The answer is, perhaps surprisingly, yes – however , this ‘yes’ must also be understood in context of the aforementioned definitions.
It is recognized that almost all languages of what are today the Middle East and parts of North Africa derive from one parent tongue: Proto Afro-Asiatic.
This proto-language, due to several factors including the migration and isolation of people from each other over time, split off into several dialects, one of which was what is called Proto-Semitic; the parent tongue of all Semitic languages. The general consensus seems to be that Proto-Semitic had its ultimate origins in Arabia, Mesopotamia or perhaps even Africa and spread westward. The timeframe for this split is still somewhat debated.
Proto-Semitic subsequently splintered off and developed into the various Semitic languages found in the ancient Middle East. This again was due to several factors including the migration of peoples and the general isolation of these peoples from one another over time. It is important to note that this process was not immediate; it took several hundred years for P-Semitic to develop into multiple separate languages.
It should also be noted that in ancient times, there were quite a few Semitic languages. It was a good-sized language family. Unfortunately, only a small handful of these have survived into modern times.
Turning back to the Babel narrative, and taking into context the concept of “the whole world” as we just discussed earlier; It is quite reasonable to conclude that the common language referred to in the Babel narrative as (quote) “spoken by all mankind” was, in fact, what we know today as Proto-Semitic.
The Babel narrative is really quite fascinating from the perspective of historical linguistics in that it is one of very few ancient accounts of a people remembering (in a manner of speaking) the history of their language(s) - told of course in a religious context but remembered nonetheless.
To best understand this, a working definition of a few somewhat ambiguous terms must be defined.
Perhaps the most important term needing a more concise definition is (quote) “the whole world”. One must try and put into context and perspective the concept of what would have been considered “the whole world” to the original author(s) of the Babel narrative.
The answer is rather simple and straightforward: to a person or people living in what we know call the Middle East several thousand years ago, the "whole world" would have been just that; a small part of what we now call the Middle East.
The concept of a larger world existing beyond the lands these people inhabited (and those they were already familiar with) just didn’t exist. Their entire ‘world’ was confined to a relatively small area of the Levant. It is quite possible that lands even on the far borders of the Mediterranean were completely unknown to them.
The same holds true for the expression (quote) “all mankind”. Again, this term was confined to only the known people, tribes and nations encompassing their ‘world’.
So to summarize, in taking the narrative into historical context, the expressions “the whole world” and “all of mankind” must be understood to refer to a very small part and population of what we today call the Middle East.
Was there or could there indeed have been a common language spoken by (quote/unquote) “all mankind”?! From the point of historical linguistics, this is certainly an intriguing question!
The answer is, perhaps surprisingly, yes – however , this ‘yes’ must also be understood in context of the aforementioned definitions.
It is recognized that almost all languages of what are today the Middle East and parts of North Africa derive from one parent tongue: Proto Afro-Asiatic.
This proto-language, due to several factors including the migration and isolation of people from each other over time, split off into several dialects, one of which was what is called Proto-Semitic; the parent tongue of all Semitic languages. The general consensus seems to be that Proto-Semitic had its ultimate origins in Arabia, Mesopotamia or perhaps even Africa and spread westward. The timeframe for this split is still somewhat debated.
Proto-Semitic subsequently splintered off and developed into the various Semitic languages found in the ancient Middle East. This again was due to several factors including the migration of peoples and the general isolation of these peoples from one another over time. It is important to note that this process was not immediate; it took several hundred years for P-Semitic to develop into multiple separate languages.
It should also be noted that in ancient times, there were quite a few Semitic languages. It was a good-sized language family. Unfortunately, only a small handful of these have survived into modern times.
Turning back to the Babel narrative, and taking into context the concept of “the whole world” as we just discussed earlier; It is quite reasonable to conclude that the common language referred to in the Babel narrative as (quote) “spoken by all mankind” was, in fact, what we know today as Proto-Semitic.
Part 2 -
What is fascinating is that even back then it was recognized that there must have been at one time some parent language, some “common tongue” for the various languages people encountered in their “world”. The (somewhat) mutual intelligibility between these languages, or at the very least the similarity in cognate vocabulary, surely must have been recognized.
As just one example, the word for 'god' is essentially the same word in Hebrew "el" as it is in Arabic "allah" as it is in Assyrian and Babylonian (a/k/a Akkadian) "ilu", Phoenician 'l, and Ugaritic 'il. Surely people even back then would have recognized the similarity and further realized they all must have come from the same source language, some ‘parent tongue’, some “one language spoken by all mankind”. In the case of our example, the Proto Semitic *'il.
This concept of recognizing the similarity in current languages (cognate words, core grammatical words – things like pronouns, numbers, etc.) and postulating that they all must have derived from some common parent tongue seems to have been preserved in the oral tradition of these people via the Babel narrative. This is actually something quite remarkable.
To these people however, the reasons for the various related languages they encountered would not have been known or understood. They would have no concept of the ‘hows and whys’ of the splintering off of the parent tongue, Proto-Semitic; they just knew there are now several distinct languages and the similarities between them seem to point to one parent language at one time.
How did they account for this “confounding” of languages?
As with many things not clearly understood by ancient man, the reasons were usually attributed to a deity, some “act of God”, if you will.
To these people, this somewhat strange act of God must have begged the question: “Why would God have done such a thing?”
I would argue that the Tower itself is more of a literary device than anything; it is pure allegory/metaphor – perhaps the intentional creation of a “back story”, if you will, to explain the reason for the current situation, and to have a vehicle by which to attribute the event as an “act of God”. It’s likely the tower itself was modeled after the ziggurats common in Babylonia; so not something just out of the blue or seemingly far- fetched. In any event, the tower itself may be considered as just a metaphor for man wanting to connect to/become closer to God. I don’t believe it was ever something literal or concrete – i.e. an actual physical structure, despite what some TV shows might like one to believe. Indeed, it has also been suggested that the tower is a metaphor for the human mind, representing how man can be high minded, egotistical, disobedient and rebellious against God.
Here was a story that was easy to understand and relate to: As a result of an adverse action/deed perpetrated by mankind as a united intention to try and become like God, God put an end to it by confounding man’s languages and making communication between people difficult, if not impossible, so that they would not be able to complete their intended task.
It seems that this diversity in languages was seen as something instantaneous and probably quite miraculous and mysterious – Again, there was no concept of languages changing and diverging very slowly over long periods of time. People just knew that at one time, there was one language spoken by everyone, and now there were several.
Let’s examine a few facts which I suspect are typically glossed over by most people.
It is important to note that, while the Babel account does indicate a common original language, it does not claim that said language was Hebrew (as many people think/assume). I think this is assumed due to the fact that Hebrew is the sacerdotal (the holy) language of Judaism. For Jews, the language of God.
There is also zero indication in the narrative that God necessarily used a supernatural process in ‘confounding’ the languages. The narrative is completely silent in this matter.
Further, and perhaps most importantly, though most people interpret and assume it as such, the account does not claim that this diversification of languages was an immediate event. This is perhaps the most common concept that is read, or perhaps I should say, ‘misread’, into the text.
There’s no reason not to think that a very natural process in language development took place.
It seems that people felt this was an important part of their tradition and culture and thus should be remembered. But given that only an oral tradition existed, how does one get people to remember an important story and not forget it in a few generations?
In many ancient cultures, the best way is to tell such a story, and have it remembered, is in a religious context; it’s much less likely to be forgotten over generations because it becomes part of both the cultural and, more so, religious traditions of the people.
Thus, one might imagine, the Babel narrative was woven – a combining of history (as it was understood back then) and religion into a powerful story with a specific message.
The Babel narrative is also interesting in that it relates that these original speakers came from the East. This is generally regarded as the “migration route” of Proto-Semitic, i.e. the original Sprachgebiet (language area) was to the east of what is now Israel and the surrounding countries and moved westward.
If, however, the religious context is extracted for a moment, the result is a fairly accurate historical account of what happened - speakers of Proto Semitic migrated towards the west and as they migrated and became isolated nations, groups, etc., their languages eventually splintered off into what would have been at first just dialects of P-Semitic, but over time, separate but a very closely related group of languages (a “confounding” of languages from one parent tongue).
When the religious context is added back in, the notion commonly assumed is that God used the confounding of languages to scatter the people, however, it may be argued that “God scattered the people to cause a confusion of languages ”.
Indeed, it seems that Babel may have served as the focus point, or ‘ground zero’ for this confusion of languages to start. We then see where God scatters the people, no mention that the languages were confounded before he scattered them, which seems to indicate that this is, in fact, the means by which the languages become confounded.
An interesting take on the narrative as it fits more closely with what actually happened historically.
As an interesting aside, the story in Genesis makes an interesting play on words, seemingly deriving the name Babel, from the sound of sheep because of the confusion of languages; i.e. sounding like a bunch of sheep bah-bah-ing). Babel, however, comes from Bâbilim – the Akkadian/Babylonian word meaning the “gate of the gods”.
What is fascinating is that even back then it was recognized that there must have been at one time some parent language, some “common tongue” for the various languages people encountered in their “world”. The (somewhat) mutual intelligibility between these languages, or at the very least the similarity in cognate vocabulary, surely must have been recognized.
As just one example, the word for 'god' is essentially the same word in Hebrew "el" as it is in Arabic "allah" as it is in Assyrian and Babylonian (a/k/a Akkadian) "ilu", Phoenician 'l, and Ugaritic 'il. Surely people even back then would have recognized the similarity and further realized they all must have come from the same source language, some ‘parent tongue’, some “one language spoken by all mankind”. In the case of our example, the Proto Semitic *'il.
This concept of recognizing the similarity in current languages (cognate words, core grammatical words – things like pronouns, numbers, etc.) and postulating that they all must have derived from some common parent tongue seems to have been preserved in the oral tradition of these people via the Babel narrative. This is actually something quite remarkable.
To these people however, the reasons for the various related languages they encountered would not have been known or understood. They would have no concept of the ‘hows and whys’ of the splintering off of the parent tongue, Proto-Semitic; they just knew there are now several distinct languages and the similarities between them seem to point to one parent language at one time.
How did they account for this “confounding” of languages?
As with many things not clearly understood by ancient man, the reasons were usually attributed to a deity, some “act of God”, if you will.
To these people, this somewhat strange act of God must have begged the question: “Why would God have done such a thing?”
I would argue that the Tower itself is more of a literary device than anything; it is pure allegory/metaphor – perhaps the intentional creation of a “back story”, if you will, to explain the reason for the current situation, and to have a vehicle by which to attribute the event as an “act of God”. It’s likely the tower itself was modeled after the ziggurats common in Babylonia; so not something just out of the blue or seemingly far- fetched. In any event, the tower itself may be considered as just a metaphor for man wanting to connect to/become closer to God. I don’t believe it was ever something literal or concrete – i.e. an actual physical structure, despite what some TV shows might like one to believe. Indeed, it has also been suggested that the tower is a metaphor for the human mind, representing how man can be high minded, egotistical, disobedient and rebellious against God.
Here was a story that was easy to understand and relate to: As a result of an adverse action/deed perpetrated by mankind as a united intention to try and become like God, God put an end to it by confounding man’s languages and making communication between people difficult, if not impossible, so that they would not be able to complete their intended task.
It seems that this diversity in languages was seen as something instantaneous and probably quite miraculous and mysterious – Again, there was no concept of languages changing and diverging very slowly over long periods of time. People just knew that at one time, there was one language spoken by everyone, and now there were several.
Let’s examine a few facts which I suspect are typically glossed over by most people.
It is important to note that, while the Babel account does indicate a common original language, it does not claim that said language was Hebrew (as many people think/assume). I think this is assumed due to the fact that Hebrew is the sacerdotal (the holy) language of Judaism. For Jews, the language of God.
There is also zero indication in the narrative that God necessarily used a supernatural process in ‘confounding’ the languages. The narrative is completely silent in this matter.
Further, and perhaps most importantly, though most people interpret and assume it as such, the account does not claim that this diversification of languages was an immediate event. This is perhaps the most common concept that is read, or perhaps I should say, ‘misread’, into the text.
There’s no reason not to think that a very natural process in language development took place.
It seems that people felt this was an important part of their tradition and culture and thus should be remembered. But given that only an oral tradition existed, how does one get people to remember an important story and not forget it in a few generations?
In many ancient cultures, the best way is to tell such a story, and have it remembered, is in a religious context; it’s much less likely to be forgotten over generations because it becomes part of both the cultural and, more so, religious traditions of the people.
Thus, one might imagine, the Babel narrative was woven – a combining of history (as it was understood back then) and religion into a powerful story with a specific message.
The Babel narrative is also interesting in that it relates that these original speakers came from the East. This is generally regarded as the “migration route” of Proto-Semitic, i.e. the original Sprachgebiet (language area) was to the east of what is now Israel and the surrounding countries and moved westward.
If, however, the religious context is extracted for a moment, the result is a fairly accurate historical account of what happened - speakers of Proto Semitic migrated towards the west and as they migrated and became isolated nations, groups, etc., their languages eventually splintered off into what would have been at first just dialects of P-Semitic, but over time, separate but a very closely related group of languages (a “confounding” of languages from one parent tongue).
When the religious context is added back in, the notion commonly assumed is that God used the confounding of languages to scatter the people, however, it may be argued that “God scattered the people to cause a confusion of languages ”.
Indeed, it seems that Babel may have served as the focus point, or ‘ground zero’ for this confusion of languages to start. We then see where God scatters the people, no mention that the languages were confounded before he scattered them, which seems to indicate that this is, in fact, the means by which the languages become confounded.
An interesting take on the narrative as it fits more closely with what actually happened historically.
As an interesting aside, the story in Genesis makes an interesting play on words, seemingly deriving the name Babel, from the sound of sheep because of the confusion of languages; i.e. sounding like a bunch of sheep bah-bah-ing). Babel, however, comes from Bâbilim – the Akkadian/Babylonian word meaning the “gate of the gods”.
This is how my mind works
“Was there or could there indeed have been a common language spoken by (quote/unquote) “all mankind”?! From the point of historical linguistics, this is certainly an intriguing question!”
Absolutely not even a question because my answers are always found here in scripture establishing what I certainly believe
“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
Genesis 11:1, 6-9 KJV
I may be a simple rube and have been called a hillbilly and sort of enjoy that title lol because that’s where I’m from but anyways , I might be simple but my belief is that the scriptures are true and hold the answers to anything I need to know science doesn’t , the government doesn’t , even my own reasoning doesn’t
While you probably have A lot Of good points I’m more of a scripture believer and try not to question and rethink but again this is just me .
It doesn’t make me an authority or the one with the right answer it’s just how my own thinking works regarding the Bible and what it says even if something doesnt seem logical I’m foolish enough to accept it as the truth because of who said it
Aim my view the Bible is pretty clear all mankind ( of course fewer at that time ) spoke one original language because they were born of one original man and woman
as d eventually through mans rebellion God decided to confound thier speech so they couldn’t understand each other all as one language and then he created the nations ( could be that’s where the seperate continents came from because beforehand at creation ( all the dry land was gathered in one place ) and of Gods speaks anything is possible just a thought though
anyways after that I’m the beginning when it came time for salvation God was needing to speak A message originally written and spoken in Hebrew and Aramaic he needed to get that message to the people of the other nations and languages from that language into all of thier languages in order to carry out the gospel commission to all creatures of earth
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”
Mark 16:15 KJV
God doesn’t command us to do things we aren’t capable of so he gave them the gift of tongues or ( languages ) in order to accomplish the preaching of the gospel
God established one language one people , he then confounded it and spread languages and nations across the earth because of mans rebellion , later when salvstion came forth he brought his one message to all people of all nations and languages for the furthering of his kingdom
a notice how “ tongues “ really could be said “ languages “
“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, ( languages) as the Spirit gave them utterance.
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. ( at the time current )
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, ( language ) wherein we were born? Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues ( languages ) the wonderful works of God.”
Acts 2:4-6, 8, 11 KJV
See how again they were confounded over the language issue ? And how god solved it ? How now with the continuing gift of tongues to the church , every person could hear the witness of the gospel in the language they understand and either reject or believe the gospel
To me that’s where tongues is useful and practical and makes sense but I’m just a fellow person who studies scriptire and likes to discuss it
Nothing more or anything just my own opinion and what impersonally believe from scripture
always respect other opinions and thought also
“Was there or could there indeed have been a common language spoken by (quote/unquote) “all mankind”?! From the point of historical linguistics, this is certainly an intriguing question!”
Absolutely not even a question because my answers are always found here in scripture establishing what I certainly believe
“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
Genesis 11:1, 6-9 KJV
I may be a simple rube and have been called a hillbilly and sort of enjoy that title lol because that’s where I’m from but anyways , I might be simple but my belief is that the scriptures are true and hold the answers to anything I need to know science doesn’t , the government doesn’t , even my own reasoning doesn’t
While you probably have A lot Of good points I’m more of a scripture believer and try not to question and rethink but again this is just me .
It doesn’t make me an authority or the one with the right answer it’s just how my own thinking works regarding the Bible and what it says even if something doesnt seem logical I’m foolish enough to accept it as the truth because of who said it
Aim my view the Bible is pretty clear all mankind ( of course fewer at that time ) spoke one original language because they were born of one original man and woman
as d eventually through mans rebellion God decided to confound thier speech so they couldn’t understand each other all as one language and then he created the nations ( could be that’s where the seperate continents came from because beforehand at creation ( all the dry land was gathered in one place ) and of Gods speaks anything is possible just a thought though
anyways after that I’m the beginning when it came time for salvation God was needing to speak A message originally written and spoken in Hebrew and Aramaic he needed to get that message to the people of the other nations and languages from that language into all of thier languages in order to carry out the gospel commission to all creatures of earth
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”
Mark 16:15 KJV
God doesn’t command us to do things we aren’t capable of so he gave them the gift of tongues or ( languages ) in order to accomplish the preaching of the gospel
God established one language one people , he then confounded it and spread languages and nations across the earth because of mans rebellion , later when salvstion came forth he brought his one message to all people of all nations and languages for the furthering of his kingdom
a notice how “ tongues “ really could be said “ languages “
“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, ( languages) as the Spirit gave them utterance.
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. ( at the time current )
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, ( language ) wherein we were born? Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues ( languages ) the wonderful works of God.”
Acts 2:4-6, 8, 11 KJV
See how again they were confounded over the language issue ? And how god solved it ? How now with the continuing gift of tongues to the church , every person could hear the witness of the gospel in the language they understand and either reject or believe the gospel
To me that’s where tongues is useful and practical and makes sense but I’m just a fellow person who studies scriptire and likes to discuss it
Nothing more or anything just my own opinion and what impersonally believe from scripture
always respect other opinions and thought also
Tower of Babel took place (([[AFTER))]] the Flood of Noah.
What does that mean?
ONLY PEOPLE in existence on the entire planet Earth were from Noah.
So once again, the unsaved Kavik is spouting baloney no one should be paying attention to.
But here's what did happen according to God (in my attachment)
What does that mean?
ONLY PEOPLE in existence on the entire planet Earth were from Noah.
So once again, the unsaved Kavik is spouting baloney no one should be paying attention to.
But here's what did happen according to God (in my attachment)
Attachments
“ONLY PEOPLE in existence on the entire planet Earth were from Noah.”
good point and why would Noah have spoken a different language from the nine generations before him all
His direct descendants
or what need would God have had before Babel to cause men to speak different languages when he presents the issue in genesis ten and then confounds thier languages to stop what they were all together communicating and doing
But probably shouldn’t try to determine who is “ saved “ or not that’s not our place
“For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, And every tongue shall confess to God.
So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.”
Romans 14:9-13 KJV
disagreeing and debating with someone is one thing but then labeling them “ unsaved” if they disagree is not a wise proposition
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”
Matthew 7:1 KJV
good point and why would Noah have spoken a different language from the nine generations before him all
His direct descendants
or what need would God have had before Babel to cause men to speak different languages when he presents the issue in genesis ten and then confounds thier languages to stop what they were all together communicating and doing
But probably shouldn’t try to determine who is “ saved “ or not that’s not our place
“For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, And every tongue shall confess to God.
So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.”
Romans 14:9-13 KJV
disagreeing and debating with someone is one thing but then labeling them “ unsaved” if they disagree is not a wise proposition
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”
Matthew 7:1 KJV
-
1
- Show all
You do not know what you are talking about.
The word of God showed the empowering of the Holy Spirit to be witness can happen at salvation, after being saved, as the book of Acts shows us.
Jesus's Disciples saved were empowered by the Holy Spirit after they were saved. Acts chapter 2
Acts 19:1-7 the disciples at Ephesus.
All saved baptism of repentance then were empowered by the Holy Spirit.
Paul was saved, Baptized, and empowered by the Holy Spirit all in one day.
We see a Distinction between empowerment, salvation, and baptism, even if they happen simultaneously or later. Pentecostals do not teach distinct work apart from the initial salvation experience.
THE WORD OF GOD DOES.
I don't work in facts; I work in truth which is a higher form than facts. Your issue is with Acts chapters 1, 2, 10, 11, and 19, along with John 20:22 And Luke 24:49.
I also will add you bring no scriptural support for your position, only talking points.
-
1
- Show all