problem related to praying in tongues

Jews from Judea spoke Aramaic as their mother tongue. I don’t think there’s any argument there.

Jews (as well as anyone else) from the Western Diaspora spoke Greek – all those lands had been Hellenized for centuries and Greek had long displaced indigenous languages. Jews adopted Koiné Greek thus their native language was more or less uniform no matter where in the Western Diaspora they came from.

The Eastern Diaspora was different – no Hellenization, and countries had their own languages. Though people in Jewish communities in these lands spoke the local languages in varying degrees of fluency, it was never their ‘mother tongue’. For Jews in the Eastern Diaspora, the language of ‘hearth and home’, the language “wherein they were born” was Aramaic. This language was one of the things that set them apart as being Jewish; it gave them their cultural and religious identity. Think of the Jews during the Babylonian Captivity/Exile – they did not abandon their language in favor of Babylonian; they held onto it and preserved it as part of their Jewish identity.

To try and use a more modern analogy – think of the Jewish Diaspora in Central and Eastern Europe prior to WWII. Many countries, many languages, and Jewish people living in these places spoke the local language in varying degrees of fluency. But it was never their native language, the language of hearth and home, the language 'wherein they were born' – that language was Yiddish. The one language that defined them as Jews no matter where they were from. Same situation in the 1st century Eastern Diaspora, the defining language (the equivalent of my analogy’s Yiddish) was Aramaic. Yiddish today, almost 1.000 years later, is still the first language of many European as well as American Jews.

Many lands, many places and people, but only two languages; Aramaic and Greek. The apostles spoke both (though perhaps not all 12 spoke Greek)

At Pentecost, the Holy Spirit gave the 12 apostles (yes, only 12, not 120 - but that's a story for another day) what in the Greek text is “apophtheggesthai” – usually translated as “to give utterance”. Unfortunately, this is not the best or most accurate translation of this Greek word, but it’s the one that has come to be the more or less ‘de facto’ rendering.

This word is from “apophtheggomai” which is best translated as “to give bold, authoritative, inspired speech to” (don’t go to Strong’s and look it up – “Strong’s” is a concordance , not a lexicon; there’s a huge difference).

It refers not to the content/means of the speech (i.e., the language used), but rather to the manner of speaking. In each instance where this word occurs in scripture, the person's speech is bold, authoritative, and inspired, and it is always, by the way, in the speaker’s native language.

In short, the Holy Spirit did not give the language (i.e. the means/content), it gave the manner in which it was spoken.

Agreed, Lexicon's are OPINION at Best, which is most likely why You are promoting it!

This is a very informative reply... you've given me a lot to think about... and this is actually worth thinking about, to me.
I'll get back with you on this topic... thanks

He's right in the sense : as the Holy Spirit gives utterance

Well, that is the problem you have.

all three I listed before. Where they lived was on a trade route --- they would encouter all three languages.

"As discussed by Kritikakou-Nikolaropoulou, more than 400 Christian tombstones have been discovered in Zoora, almost all of which are inscribed in Greek. ... Most Jewish tombstones from Zoar (Zoora) carry Aramaic inscriptions painted in red ochre." https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...-give-insight-into-early-jews-and-christians/
The team believes the tablet is one of the most important inscriptions ever found in Israel, predating the previously earliest known Hebrew inscription by several hundred years, and one that could drastically alter our reconstruction of ancient Israel’s earliest history.
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/inscriptions/mt_ebal_inscription/
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...n-relates-the-birth-of-the-kingdom-of-israel/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Warning_inscription
https://www.bible.ca/manuscripts/bi...3-29LXX-Rheneia-Island-Delos-Greece-100BC.htm
Josephus writes about a series of stone slabs that give warnings to foreigners, some written in Greek, others Latin, that no foreigner was permitted to enter the Temple area (see Jewish Wars 5.194).
https://www.newtestamentredux.com/museum/warning-sign-to-greeks-on-the-temple-mount/

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/tag/inscriptions-2/
https://www.christianity.com/wiki/jesus-christ/what-was-the-language-of-jesus.html

"
The language that the children of Israel spoke in the days of the Old Testament was Hebrew. However in 586 B.C. they went into the Babylonian captivity where Aramaic was main spoken language. Aramaic, a sister language to Hebrew, began to spoken by the Jews from the Babylonian captivity onward.
When Jesus came into the world the Greek language was spoken in all parts of the Roman Empire. There were however, both local and regional dialects. It seems the Jewish people in Israel Jesus' day continued to speak Aramaic.
Greek Was The International Language
Greek became the international language through the conquests of Alexander the Great (330 B.C.). We know that Jesus was able to speak Greek because several of His conversations could have only taken place in the Greek language. This includes the account of His speaking to the woman with the demon-possessed child (Matthew 14) as well as His conversations with Pontius Pilate.
Aramaic Was Also Spoken
Jesus also spoke Aramaic in His public ministry. We have several recorded sayings of Jesus in the Gospels that are transliterated from Aramaic to Greek. These include the words He uttered at the raising of Jairus' daughter.
Here Mark translates the Aramaic phrase for his readers. Other Aramaic words found in the New Testament are abba, and ephphatha.
Hebrew May Have Been Spoken
There is the possibility that Jesus spoke in Hebrew at times. Some people argue that Hebrew was actually the main language that Jesus spoke but this is a minority view.
Latin Was Spoken Only By The Elite
Although Latin was the official language of the Roman Empire it was not spoken by the masses. Only the aristocracy would converse in Latin.
The Sign Over The Cross Was In Three Languages
The sign over the cross of Jesus illustrates the fact of the many languages spoken at that time.
Summary
The world in which Jesus came had an international language, Greek. Jesus obviously spoke Greek. There are certain occasions that the New Testament records for us where Jesus would have had to have spoken Greek - to the Syro-Phoenecian woman as well as to Pontius Pilate. On other occasions He probably spoke Aramaic. It is possible that He spoke Hebrew on occasion. We know that He could read Hebrew.

" https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_200.cfm

As you can see like the USA, it was a multi-language area.

Another one of the downfalls leading to destruction....
There was a time when it was a source of pride for a new comer to
learn English.

Seems so

1 Corinthians 14:2

New International Version

2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.

A lot of it is babble and emotionally driven. Paul makes it clear that unless speaking in tongues edifies and helps others, it's best that those who have this gift keep it between themselves and God.

I have never experienced this personally in all my years of being a Christian. But I'm way too rational, also.

Thanks for sharing that. My friend said she prayed for this particular gift and eventually received it. I'm not in a position to judge if it is genuine or not, but question why it is unintelligible.

1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps the quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible.

If one were to paraphrase the KJB version of this verse into a more modern English, you'd need to get rid of the added “unknown”, use a more accurate translation from the Greek, and a more modern rendering of the archaic English word “tongue” –

Once done, you might end up with something more like this –

“He that speaks in a language isn’t speaking to others, but only to God; no one hears [him] with understanding; nevertheless, though he’s praying in the Spirit, he’s speaking mysteries.”

The whole passage is talking about real, rational language.

Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything but English is pretty slim to nil.

If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one there will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at that particular service.

In this sense, therefore, I am speaking only to God, since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined further below), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” – i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me; no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language.

When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying.

There is nothing in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even remotely suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the listeners who do not understand, not the speaker – no matter how hard modern tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….unless the author of the text is a bad grammarian, it just isn’t there.

“Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will.

You are wrong.

1 Cor 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

From your profile:
Have you become a Christian yet?

Everything you say is spot on; but unfortunately it won't matter to tongue talkers. Their emotions cloud their understanding of scripture. I wish it were otherwise, but long hard experience tells me it's the sad truth.

Your hard-heartedness and lack of understanding is what's telling you it's the "truth."

from his response it appears "long hard experience" is based on blinding, concrete like, ignorance by choice.

A natural explanation for a event caused by God that is anything but a human natural response.

The stupid is real if you think you will tongue twist those who know the difference.

I spoke to you before and you don't actually claim to be Saved.

You are not Holy Spirit filled and Saved but here trying to explain a Supernatural Event?

Like I said, the Stupid is Real!