zone,
Did you post the message from John MacArthur: " John MacArthur - Is Speaking in Tongues Demonic? 1/3" because you agree with it?
This is a sermon where John MacAthur attributes a manifestation of the Spirit.... in the actual Bible itself... to pagan sources.
I've heard it before, and I've pulled up the text, but I don't know where the cut-off is on the video. But I am commenting based on the text on his ministry website.
MacArthur misuses the Greek in this sermon badly. A trigger warning to those who are sensitive to reading blasphemous interpretations of scripture. But this is his commentary on I Corinthians 14
“For he that speaks in a tongue speaks not unto men, but unto God; for no man understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.” Now listen. What’d he say? He that speaks in a tongue speaks to men…speaks rather not to men, but to God. And the Greek literally says, “But to a god.”
What you have Paul doing here is saying, “Look, you people with your pagan ecstasies are not doing what all spiritual gifts were given to do, that is to speak to men. But rather, your ecstasies are speaking to a God. Nobody understands what you’re saying; you are all wrapped up in speaking pagan mysteries.” Do you see what he’s saying? Those aren’t the mustērion of God; those aren't the mysteries that Paul gave; those are the mysteries of paganism. He that speaks in a tongue speaks not unto men.
Let's look that up. Does that mean 'but to a god'? Is that how Paul is using it?
ἀλλὰ Θεῷ
The KJV says this means 'but to God.' John MacArthur taught that it should be translated 'a god.'
Which God were the authors of I Thessalonians pleasing?
I Thessalonians 2
4But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who tests our hearts.
Clearly, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy were seeing to please the true God, not some pagan deity.
And what of 'mysteries.' Paul always uses the Greek word translated 'mysteries' here in a positive sense. He writes of the mystery of Christ, and the mystery that was kept secret since the world began. We never find Paul using this word to refer to the mystery religions.
Maybe they don't teach this level of Greek in double honorary doctorate school. I don't know. I wonder what goes through a preacher's mind when he teaches this kind of error. Does John MacArthur know that the Greek could either refer to God or a god, but asserts that it means 'a god' because he wants to convince his audience? Would that be honest?
Does he really not know Greek well enough to differentiate, but wants to sound authoritative, so he acts like an expert where his knowledge his shaky. (This is a huge problem with preachers of various backgrounds that irks me badly.)
Is he so confident in his ability to guess what the Greek in a passage means that he just assumes its true.
It is clear that this is a horrific butchering of the text.
John MacArthur also said this,
And some Bible scholars believe that that’s because when Paul was using the singular, he was referring to their ecstatic gibberish, which all was one kind, a tongue, a gibberish. But when he refers to the true gift, it is languages, like in Acts, and every man heard him in his own language. So in verses 1-4 he’s saying, “Your false gift is all wrong.” But in verse 5, “The right thing is all right when it’s interpreted in its place.”
Why repeat a junk interpretation in a sermon without pointing out that it is a junk interpretation? This is clearly false. Paul says "I speak with tongues more than ye all" in the plural. He commands the church to allow 'if any man speak in an unknown tongue' in verse 27. One can easily use an interlinear to debunk this argument, checking the use of singular and plurals by looking at the marks under the words in Greek. You don't even have to know Greek. You can use scripture4all's interlinear. A lot of 'Greek myths' taught by preachers like this can be easily debunked.
Some people think of John MacArthur as a great scholar. I don't know about all his stuff. I read some seemingly sensible stuff from him on a commentary on Matthew. He is also bold confronting the promotion of homosexuality as normal and other topics on TV news shows. That's good. But on this issue, his use of scripture seems more like the junk that Murray guy used to teach on Shepherds Chapel. It's just garbage, twisting the text, misusing Greek, and attributing the work of the Spirit to pagan sources, which is a bad and disturbing thing to do. I sincerely believe a pile of cow manure has more value for mankind that John MacArthur's twisting of scripture posted in the above quote.
Paul wants the believer who spoke in a 'tongue' singular to interpret it, or for someone else to, for the church to be edified. Paul would not have taught to interpret false pagan ramblings. It is notable that John MacArthur departs from verse by verse teaching on this subject. His assertions just will not hold water.
Christians should oppose this type of scripture twisting. Cessationists should oppose this type of scripture twisting.
Zone, do you think Paul wanted the Corinthians to interpret false pagan mystery religion utterances in order to edify the church? Isn't that a blasphemous interpretation?
