Concerning the gift of tongues

It is recorded. Just look at other historical books/ commentaries on Corinth

What's the difference between the tongues at pentecost and the gift of tongues?

no I did my own research on it nowhere is there any records of pagan tongues in the corinthian church and especially not in scripture which we should take over books and commentaries
scholars theorize about it but no there is no actual records of such a thing happening

the tongues at pentecost were as tongues of fire the gift of tongues is merely speaking a foriegn language not native to your own tongue

Was it literal tongues of fire or was it something that had an appearance of fire?

Also, what scriptural foundation do you have for tongues being personal?

I believe in tongues, just letting you know. But I always love to hear fellow believers explanation.

I get you..the Bible doesn't explicitly say anything about pagan tongues..but the Corinth area had that and the church at Corinth had problems associated with the pagan religions.

the scriptures say this Acts 2:3, which states, "Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them." it appears that it was a physical manifestation , but what do mean by tongues being personal? maybe I am having a brain fart but I am not sure what you mean

That's approaching the Bible with a presupposition. You are assuming that because they had certain issues with pagan tradition, that they had an issue in this area. My friend, the Bible is the foundation, we have to approach our understanding without presuppositions. My first mentor always pressed me to explain what I believe if I made a claim, and he would always tell me to search it for yourself before addressing any external resources on the topic.

Well I think if God wanted us to know that the church was doing pagan practices like that he would have had them write it down in his word otherwise it is merely speculation
besides that the church was seperate from the rest of the people around them and if they were doing it then Paul would have addressed it especially considering what a massive sin that is

Mistranslation, most copies will affirm what appeared to them like tongues of fire or divided tongues of fire. It means that it was not literal. Here, it is a little confusing because instead of "like" they use "as of".

Personal Prayer language.

Are you not planning to give me the courtesy of answering my question after I have answered yours?

I did, I asked the first question for the relation of the second follow-up question. No in particular reason, just asking questions.

This is why we need to search the doctrinal epistles for answers rather than speculate on the basis of historical passages.

Answer: The Bible states edification.

Question: Does anyone today know what tongues in the New Testament sounded like?

Follow-up: If it is for edification, whose to say that one cannot have a personal prayer language?

No.

I don't take it personally although its tiresome since it's so repetitive. It's spiritual gifts he is having a bad relationship with.

Anyone can have a youtube channel and there are no checks and balances. As long as you don't break the rules, you are good to go

Right. We already had this exchange and there is no doubt that Corinth was a hotbed of paganism. It was a port city which added to the goings on. But we are not discussing Corinth and paganism. Why do you choose to believe a website over scripture? Paul was correcting the way the gift was used. He never said it was demonic or gave any other objection. In fact, he encouraged it, but said it should be done peacefully and in order.

26 Well, my brothers and sisters, let’s summarize. When you meet together, one will sing, another will teach, another will tell some special revelation God has given, one will speak in tongues, and another will interpret what is said. But everything that is done must strengthen all of you.

27 No more than two or three should speak in tongues. They must speak one at a time, and someone must interpret what they say. 28 But if no one is present who can interpret, they must be silent in your church meeting and speak in tongues to God privately.

29 Let two or three people prophesy, and let the others evaluate what is said. 30 But if someone is prophesying and another person receives a revelation from the Lord, the one who is speaking must stop. 31 In this way, all who prophesy will have a turn to speak, one after the other, so that everyone will learn and be encouraged. 32 Remember that people who prophesy are in control of their spirit and can take turns. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the meetings of God’s holy people.[a]

34 Women should be silent during the church meetings. It is not proper for them to speak. They should be submissive, just as the law says. 35 If they have any questions, they should ask their husbands at home, for it is improper for women to speak in church meetings.[b]

36 Or do you think God’s word originated with you Corinthians? Are you the only ones to whom it was given? 37 If you claim to be a prophet or think you are spiritual, you should recognize that what I am saying is a command from the Lord himself. 38 But if you do not recognize this, you yourself will not be recognized.[c]

39 So, my dear brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and don’t forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But be sure that everything is done properly and in order. I Cor. 14

No mention of paganism or the Corinthians speaking in demonic tongues. So, it seems your objections are personal rather than biblical

Ocean has the same fruit that those "charlatans" that he himself rails against.

He admits correctly of the bogus nature of the many fake tongues in the world but what is different about his tongues then those that he calls out?

Something is really bothering you and it is not me. Since I have referred to scripture, quoted scripture and so have others, you would appear to be using something other than scripture upon which to base your repetitive nonsense.

Your problem is with scripture and your imagination regarding anything I said has run off with you. Do you even know what the fruit of the Spirit is? smh

Since you state that no one knows what NT tongues sounded like, how then can you make the claim that tongues today are only gibberish? You sure do seem to be double minded depending on what point you want to make and to whom you want to make it.