TONGUES TODAY

[SophieT]

There was a time when a fellow believer was playing a keyboard and singing in tongues.....he had a beautiful voice....and as I listened, I was suddenly amazed at how I could hear him singing in tongues with my natural ears yet, in my mind I heard his voice singing in English which is my native language. I believe this to be the gift of the interpretation of tongues....you can understand every word spoken because you hear it with your spiritual ears in your head in your native language.

He was singing about the majesty and glory of God....that nothing compares to God and how none can attain to the height of the Most High God....we all just fall in our efforts and bow at His feet in worship because NONE can go as high as the Most High God....everything about God is greater than every effort.....NONE can compare....NONE can do better or be better or know more or love more or humble themselves more....NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING can any angel or human or any being do that compares to God The Most High.

It was absolutely wonderful and amazing! I greatly desire the gift of the interpretation of tongues....it is needed in the Body of Christ.

many times I have sung 'in the spirit' at home and then begin singing in English. I cannot even make up the words of worship describing God and Jesus and these dunkin dudes want to tell us we are demonic or perhaps senile or making things up

and on top of that, when singing in worship to our Creator, I am so filled with His presence by His Spirit...the peace and the joy are as described in scripture. I have been loathe to get on with my day at times.

these anti-spirit people are so rigid in their pretensions of knowing God that they would fall over if they met God that way

smh

 

[SophieT]

Was that all you read... just the first sentence. sigh.

yeah

I don't do 'dirty diapers' and since you twisted what I said IN your first sentence, why would I continue?

 

[SophieT]

are you watchtower?

Your perversion of the word of God is very similar.

nah

just Southern Baptist

he revealed that in another thread

 

[SophieT]

In 1 Corinthians 12:28 Paul says: "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." I don't see "signs for Jews" in that verse, meaning that Paul never said it. How come ministries designed for the Christian church can be "signs for Jews?" Someone is adding uninspired material into Paul's inspired teaching.

Also, which of these are "signs for Jews?" Apostles, prophets, teachers? Miracles, gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues?

How can you extract healing and tongues out from the list and say they are signs for Jews, when apostles, prophets, and teachers are for the church? How can helps and governments be signs for Jews?

The answer is that it is sheer stupidity to extract just one component designed for the church and say it is a sign for Jews while ignoring the rest of the list.

Paul said that there would be those who would depart from sound doctrine and give heed to fables. Saying that the gifts of the Spirit, designed for use in the Christian church, are "signs for Jews" is one of those fables favoured by people unskilled in the basics of simple comprehension.

forget it

the gifts have been posted multiple of multiple times..quite a few in this thread...and much more in older threads

they don't care, they won't respond, they ignore the scripture and twist what it says

they are blinded of their own doing by the reprehensible language and accusations; like Paul thinking he is doing God a good deed by persecuting Christians

however, unlike Paul who had an excuse, they do not

 

[CS1]

I should have added that the usage predates King James, but his Bible cemented its usage to this day.

many people like you will cry Italic and added when the context doesn't fit your mindset. the word "unknown" was added and it has been there for a very long time yet, God allowed it to be so. If you take out the word "Unknown" the context of NOT knowing what is said still is very much there as Paul said. But let's remove it as you have shall we?

1cor 14:2

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth(unknown) him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.(unknown)


IF you remove the word unknown the context is still very much seen to mean "unknown" because of five words which are speaking on the UNKNOWN those words are :

No man understandeth and Speaketh Mysteries.

In addition, he is speaking to GOD ONLY! Here we see contextually a language ONLY God knows. Must be a very sad day for the linguist because God is in the Knowing of this language but not a man as the text states.

slice it dice it and call it "Italic"

But lets look at a few things to help you

1. or he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not

"NOT"= meaning: in direct questions expecting an affirmative answer. Meaning they did not speak to men


2.unto men, but unto God:

Again this states this speech or language was not for human understanding


3.for no man understandeth him;

reaffirming the inability for a man, or person(s) to understand what is being said EVER! Even a linguist why?


Because as the text states the one speaking in this tongue no man will understand because is NOT speaking so MAN can understand BUT HE is speaking to GOD therefore NO man WILL understand because HE is speaking to GOD Mysteries what is a " Mysteries"?





4.howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
Mysteries =mystērion which is hidden thing, secret, mystery or That which CAN'T be known i.e "Unknown " for the purpose

1. of God: the secret counsels which govern God in dealing with the righteous, which

This language only God knows so that those linguists cannot translate from human reasoning the purpose or plan of God as it says

are hidden from ungodly and wicked men but plain to the godly

I wonder if cherry picker read this?

 

[Absolutely]

many people like you will cry Italic and added when the context doesn't fit your mindset. the word "unknown" was added and it has been there for a very long time yet, God allowed it to be so. If you take out the word "Unknown" the context of NOT knowing what is said still is very much there as Paul said. But let's remove it as you have shall we?

1cor 14:2

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth(unknown) him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.(unknown)


IF you remove the word unknown the context is still very much seen to mean "unknown" because of five words which are speaking on the UNKNOWN those words are :

No man understandeth and Speaketh Mysteries.

In addition, he is speaking to GOD ONLY! Here we see contextually a language ONLY God knows. Must be a very sad day for the linguist because God is in the Knowing of this language but not a man as the text states.

slice it dice it and call it "Italic"

But lets look at a few things to help you

1. or he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not

"NOT"= meaning: in direct questions expecting an affirmative answer. Meaning they did not speak to men


2.unto men, but unto God:

Again this states this speech or language was not for human understanding


3.for no man understandeth him;

reaffirming the inability for a man, or person(s) to understand what is being said EVER! Even a linguist why?


Because as the text states the one speaking in this tongue no man will understand because is NOT speaking so MAN can understand BUT HE is speaking to GOD therefore NO man WILL understand because HE is speaking to GOD Mysteries what is a " Mysteries"?





4.howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
Mysteries =mystērion which is hidden thing, secret, mystery or That which CAN'T be known i.e "Unknown " for the purpose

1. of God: the secret counsels which govern God in dealing with the righteous, which

This language only God knows so that those linguists cannot translate from human reasoning the purpose or plan of God as it says

are hidden from ungodly and wicked men but plain to the godly

Yep
No brainer.

 

[Absolutely]

Now .....Thank you for the compliment of...."Gifted writers".

However that really is not what I am. All I do these days as an old man is to post what the BIBLE ACTUALLY SAYS.

In todays church, what I have seen over the years is people who say that "THIS' or "THAT" or "SOME ONE TOLD ME" and when I try to find what THIS or THAT is in the Bible......it is simply NOT THERE.

We have created a generation of people who do not know what the Bible says.....and have taken the word of FALSE TEACHERS and PASTORS without ever reading and confirming from the Bible what they are being told.

As a result, we now have a generation of people who believe that making "gibberish sounds' that make no sense in any language is Biblical and acceptable.

That same generation believes that God owes us something and if we give money to a certain man, or a Church, God then has to honor that "Fleece" offering.

That same generation also belives that there are MEN who can blow the Holy Spirit onto men and tell God to heal the sick and He will.

It is a real shame and if it was not so sad.......I would laugh but the author of the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ once said in
Matthew 7:21-24............
"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works. And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

he also said liars will not enter the kingdom


Yikes!

Now that is bad. But your REFRAMING AND SMEARING the holy bible is even worse.

 

[CS1]

Yep
No brainer.

yes to those with no bias LOL.

 

[presidente]

I've already addressed this in the discussion on the passive vs. active use of of the word. Passive "my understanding produces no fruit (in/for me):, active "my understanding produces no fruit (for/in others)"

You are thinking of a different verse. The verse I am talking about says that....in the congregation... Paul would rather speak five words with his mind than 10,000 words in an unknown tongue. Why would Paul say that if he just spoke in tongues with his mind like he spoke in Greek, or Hebrew, etc. Clearly, we use our minds when we speak languages the normal way, whether they are a first or second language to us.

 

[Absolutely]

I am blessed to read the words from someone educated in Christian theology!

You seem to have put in some study time on this subject and I wonder, and want to ask you if you have come across the fact that Some think that tongues are only practiced by Christian denominations being a special gift given by the Holy Spirit. But to the contrary, it is a phenomenon found also in many pagan religions.

I think if should be clear to anyone that “tongues” spoken by the pagan religions is different from what the New Testament records and it is not a gift from God. However, here is the problem that those who WANT to speaking tongues will not recognize........
“modern tongues” speaking has the same identical characteristics and practices as those of pagan religion.

The "speaking in tongues has been around a long time before it was being done in the city of Corinth in the 1st century.

For example, the Oracle at Delphi, for instance, which started in 400 BC, when Greece was at its strongest, records the pagan practice of using ecstatic speech in the worship of their false gods. Ecstatic speak is simply spoken unintelligible sounds that are mostly vowels. Ecstatic speech continued into the Roman era, which would indicate that members of the churches in Greece and Asia Minor would have been familiar with how the Oracle at Delphi worked. The shrine was to the Greek idol god, Apollo.

In response to someone's questions, a priestess would go into a frenzy and start a babbling speech. An attendant priest would then 'translate' the gibberish into some glittering generalities that could in some way be understood as to answer the question. Some of the best-known features of Greek philosophy streamed out from the Oracle's early years.

For instance, it bred the saying "Know Yourself" and the great Greek philosophers were very good at finding "jewels in waste water. "
(Source: Robert H. Longman, Jr. "Tongues as a Gift, a Sign, a Practice," ).

Let me guess.
You copied and pasted this from some ancient pharisee.
They were witnesses to the upper room false gibberish when satan moved on the fake believers in acts....correct?. The upper room was fake...correct?

You are simply a messenger from satan.

You have no dog in the fight but can not sit still knowing we enjoy being with God and loving on him as he showers his children with gifts.

There is a power that hates that

You are under that spell big time.

 

[Absolutely]

Why do we witness such untiring energy by some dirty believers on a mission to quench the Holy Spirit?

Such dirty dogs that waste their energy against Gods power and goodness

 

[Kavik]

many people like you will cry Italic and added when the context doesn't fit your mindset. the word "unknown" was added and it has been there for a very long time yet, God allowed it to be so. If you take out the word "Unknown" the context of NOT knowing what is said still is very much there as Paul said. But let's remove it as you have shall we?

1cor 14:2

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth(unknown) him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.(unknown)


IF you remove the word unknown the context is still very much seen to mean "unknown" because of five words which are speaking on the UNKNOWN those words are :

No man understandeth and Speaketh Mysteries.

In addition, he is speaking to GOD ONLY! Here we see contextually a language ONLY God knows. Must be a very sad day for the linguist because God is in the Knowing of this language but not a man as the text states.

slice it dice it and call it "Italic"

But lets look at a few things to help you

1. or he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not

"NOT"= meaning: in direct questions expecting an affirmative answer. Meaning they did not speak to men


2.unto men, but unto God:

Again this states this speech or language was not for human understanding


3.for no man understandeth him;

reaffirming the inability for a man, or person(s) to understand what is being said EVER! Even a linguist why?


Because as the text states the one speaking in this tongue no man will understand because is NOT speaking so MAN can understand BUT HE is speaking to GOD therefore NO man WILL understand because HE is speaking to GOD Mysteries what is a " Mysteries"?





4.howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
Mysteries =mystērion which is hidden thing, secret, mystery or That which CAN'T be known i.e "Unknown " for the purpose

1. of God: the secret counsels which govern God in dealing with the righteous, which

This language only God knows so that those linguists cannot translate from human reasoning the purpose or plan of God as it says

are hidden from ungodly and wicked men but plain to the godly

You’re still using “understandeth” – that’s not what is written; it’s ‘to hear (in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say)’; not ‘to understand’. Get rid of the archaic ‘tongue’ and replace it with the more modern “language”.

Yes, the language is indeed unknown to the listeners, they don’t speak his language, thus are hearing him without understanding what he’s saying. Only God understand him (at this particular public worship).

Even though he’s praying in the Spirit (i.e. praying in the power o the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will), to those listening to (hearing) him, he’s speaking mysteries.

Mystery still has the same meaning today – something unknown. Why is it mysterious and unknown to those hearing it? Because they do not understand what they are hearing; they don’t speak/understand his language.

It amazes me the number of ways people just have to have the speaker also not understanding what he’s saying. It’s just not there.

 

[presidente]

Yes - most people have no clue as to why the "unknown" got put there in the first place. It has zero to do with religion and 100% to do with the politics of King James.

The phrase unknown tongues, of the English Bible has a tradition that dates back to the earliest days of the Reformation. Most Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians are unaware of the history of the addition of “unknown” to ‘tongues’ and its Reformation roots. Rather, they believe the English reflects Paul’s intentions.

How many surveys of Pentecostals and Charismatics have you read to determine if they know whether 'unknown' is in the original text. There are informed Bible readers who know that italicized words in the KJV are added for readability or other reasons.

The presence of 'unknown' there does not effect historical Pentecostal doctrine. Early Pentecostals certain emphasized human languages. In I Corinthians 14, these languages are not 'known' by the congregation and someone has to interpret. One may conclude that the language is not known by the speaker either, since Paul contrasted speaking in tongues with speaking with his mind.

The creation of this idiom had powerful political and religious overtones. It was a “jab”, so-to-speak, by the early Protestants at the RCC.

It is an idiom the early Protestants created and aimed exclusively at the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church asserted its authority through the exclusive use of Latin while the Protestants volleyed back that Latin was speaking in an “unknown tongue” that no one understood. Unknown to the word tongues was added in Paul’s famous Corinthian text to win the Reformation argument.

The idiom unknown tongues became a popular doctrine in 1534 as a dispute against the Catholic Church. It was a strong statement that anything said in Latin, and not the local vernacular was not profitable.

Can you provide some historical evidence that this was the motivation in adding 'unknown', and not the desire to indicate that this was not just regular speaking in normal human language? Clearly, Protestants, especially in Germanic-language-speaking areas, took issue with church services being conducted in Latin. But can you provide some evidence that this was the motivation for adding 'unknown' to I Corinthians 14.

It is important to note that this idiom initially had no suggestion whatsoever of a mystical or supernatural sense that Pentecostals and Charismatics attach to it today.

Participants in the Azusa Street revival may have heard of the experiences of those who came in and heard their own languages being spoken 'in tongues.' It certainly showed up in the newsletter, which collected testimonies of such events from various Pentecostal meetings that were springing up throughout the world. Some of the later Charismatics might have attached a mystical sense to 'unknown.'

Pentecostals however relied heavily on their interpretation of other tongues to justify and Biblically ‘evidence’ the modern tongues-speaking experience.

That feels like a straw man. You might be able to find a few Pentecostals here and there who think that tongues cannot be a human language, and is instead some kind of spiritual language, but that certainly does not seem to be the predominant position.

In short, “unknown” in conjunction with ‘tongues’ was added by he early Protestants as a strong anti-Catholic statement, nothing more.

Again, please show some historical documentation to support your theory that this was the reason.

 

[presidente]

You’re still using “understandeth” – that’s not what is written; it’s ‘to hear (in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say)’; not ‘to understand’. Get rid of the archaic ‘tongue’ and replace it with the more modern “language”.

Yes, the language is indeed unknown to the listeners, they don’t speak his language, thus are hearing him without understanding what he’s saying. Only God understand him (at this particular public worship).

Even though he’s praying in the Spirit (i.e. praying in the power o the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will), to those listening to (hearing) him, he’s speaking mysteries.

Mystery still has the same meaning today – something unknown. Why is it mysterious and unknown to those hearing it? Because they do not understand what they are hearing; they don’t speak/understand his language.

It amazes me the number of ways people just have to have the speaker also not understanding what he’s saying. It’s just not there.

I read the passage the same way you do, as do many Pentecostals. The difference would be that you just think of speaking and tongues as something more mundane.

 

[presidente]

many people like you will cry Italic and added when the context doesn't fit your mindset. the word "unknown" was added and it has been there for a very long time yet, God allowed it to be so. If you take out the word "Unknown" the context of NOT knowing what is said still is very much there as Paul said. But let's remove it as you have shall we?

1cor 14:2

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth(unknown) him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.(unknown)


IF you remove the word unknown the context is still very much seen to mean "unknown" because of five words which are speaking on the UNKNOWN those words are :

No man understandeth and Speaketh Mysteries.

In addition, he is speaking to GOD ONLY! Here we see contextually a language ONLY God knows. Must be a very sad day for the linguist because God is in the Knowing of this language but not a man as the text states.

slice it dice it and call it "Italic"

But lets look at a few things to help you

1. or he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not

"NOT"= meaning: in direct questions expecting an affirmative answer. Meaning they did not speak to men


2.unto men, but unto God:

Again this states this speech or language was not for human understanding


3.for no man understandeth him;

reaffirming the inability for a man, or person(s) to understand what is being said EVER! Even a linguist why?


Because as the text states the one speaking in this tongue no man will understand because is NOT speaking so MAN can understand BUT HE is speaking to GOD therefore NO man WILL understand because HE is speaking to GOD Mysteries what is a " Mysteries"?





4.howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
Mysteries =mystērion which is hidden thing, secret, mystery or That which CAN'T be known i.e "Unknown " for the purpose

1. of God: the secret counsels which govern God in dealing with the righteous, which

This language only God knows so that those linguists cannot translate from human reasoning the purpose or plan of God as it says

are hidden from ungodly and wicked men but plain to the godly

I'm curious what you do with the many testimonies from the Azusa Street Revival and since of someone coming into a church meeting and hearing their own language, occasionally verifying the interpretation of tongues given.

 

[CS1]

You’re still using “understandeth” – that’s not what is written; it’s ‘to hear (in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say)’; not ‘to understand’. Get rid of the archaic ‘tongue’ and replace it with the more modern “language”.

Yes, the language is indeed unknown to the listeners, they don’t speak his language, thus are hearing him without understanding what he’s saying. Only God understand him (at this particular public worship).

Even though he’s praying in the Spirit (i.e. praying in the power o the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will), to those listening to (hearing) him, he’s speaking mysteries.

Mystery still has the same meaning today – something unknown. Why is it mysterious and unknown to those hearing it? Because they do not understand what they are hearing; they don’t speak/understand his language.

It amazes me the number of ways people just have to have the speaker also not understanding what he’s saying. It’s just not there.

wrong! No man knoweth Speaking to God not to MAN, very much in context. This language which being said to God that no man knows. Mysteries.

The term "Modern Languages" A modern language is any human language that is currently in use. This language was not as you think a modern one if so man would have understood it and there would BE no Mystery.

If you understood the Authorial intent and the context of chapters 12 through 14 it is Speaking of the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit. Linguist input is not needed. God knows what is being said that is why Paul said

" I will pray with my understanding and I will pray in the Spirit meaning tongues. The unfruitful language.

You can disagree, but the greek and context support this understanding.

So, now please lower yourself to Videos of buffoons and doctrine from pagans and the Occult to explain 1cor chapters 12 through 14 on the Supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit ok .

 

[SophieT]

It amazes me the number of ways people just have to have the speaker also not understanding what he’s saying. It’s just not there.

what religion do you follow?

 

[SophieT]

Why do we witness such untiring energy by some dirty believers on a mission to quench the Holy Spirit?

Such dirty dogs that waste their energy against Gods power and goodness

now we have aidan from the covid thread coming over and xing posts. love it when people do that and cannot be bothered to explain why they have xed a post

childish

 

[CS1]

I'm curious what you do with the many testimonies from the Azusa Street Revival and since of someone coming into a church meeting and hearing their own language, occasionally verifying the interpretation of tongues given.

I have heard of those things too yet the argument is one's experience doesn't validate the Gifts of the Holy Spirt, to which I argue; nor does your lack of experiencing remove validation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit being for today including tongues.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I'm curious what you do with the many testimonies from the Azusa Street Revival and since of someone coming into a church meeting and hearing their own language, occasionally verifying the interpretation of tongues given.

presidente, I'd be suspicious of such testimonies. I'd be more willing to believe the accounts given by early Pentecostal missionaries who went to foreign countries to put Mark 16 to the test. When they failed, this should've been enough to put an end to it then and there.

https://charlesasullivan.com/9179/pentecostal-missionary-tongues-crisis/