Search results

Not trying to get into an argument, but, I have discussed 1 Cor. 14:2 quite a bit in other threads as well as some of the things you bring up. Didn’t want to repeat myself here, but…. With respect to 1 Cor. 14:2 – The whole passage is talking about real, rational language. Let me use an...

Precisely - Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles – it stands to reason that he would use his knowledge of languages more than the average person. It was essentially part of his ‘job description’. He’s not advocating for modern tongues-speech here.

Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles – it stands to reason that he would use his knowledge of languages more than the average person. It was essentially part of his ‘job description’. He’s not advocating for modern tongues-speech here. Yes, Paul left instructions for how to handle real...

As stated, I am neither a cessationist nor a continuationist; I do not identify with either term. In fact I had never heard of either until just a few years ago. This seems to be 'born again Christian' nomenclature. As far as the audience needing an interpreter, it's because no one there at...

It's definitely not an "attack" - modern tongues-speech is what it is - non-cognitive non-language utterance. There just isn't anything you're producing that can't be explained in relatively simple linguistic terms. I'm not denying its strength/use as a spiritual tool, as I said, the "tongues...

Sort of - there's a difference. Tolkien's languages are what are popularly called "con langs", that is, constructed languages. Unlike modern tongues-speech, con langs have a definite set pronunciation, and most importantly, a set grammar and lexicon. Tolkien based the sound of his two main...

As someone mentioned - here we go again. In answer to the question, I guess it depends on who you ask - here's a Linguist's take..... There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" – when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s)...

Yes. of course. You can't understand (or perhaps better stated for some, 'criticize') a particular religious path without at least some basic knowledge of it's sacred text. Whether the Qu'ran, Bhagavad Gita, Vedas, The Avesta, Sutras, Kipitaka, ect. or the oral tradition of those...

The answer to "Good" Friday has to do with the history of the English language. The Anglo-Saxon word "gôd" means "good", the Anglo-Saxon word "god" means "God". Both words are pronounced almost alike. It was common to refer to the Christian God as "the good God" (as opposed to the...

Part 2 - One would think it impossible to study the history of Pentecostalism without, at the very least, a cursory look at this ‘tongues issue’. Because the Pentecostal doctrine and understanding on tongues was completely redefined, this would seem to present a problem – how can something like...

Part 1 - There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" – when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) – it’s their native language. In contrast, the...

They're carols, people; not scholarly Biblical dissertations - Seriously, chill out!

Up until relatively recently - they were one in the same.

Well, it's not a star; it's two planets in a grand conjunction - even though they'll be virtually right on top of each other (i.e. less than 1 degree apart to the naked eye), their conjunction will not be as bright as Venus is in the early morning sky. I think many people are expecting this...

Jews living in Egypt spoke Greek - Egypt was massively Hellenized. In fact, the everyday language of one of the largest city's in Egypt, Alexandria, was Greek; not Egyptian, which by the 1st century AD was essentially not the same language as the ancient Egyptians. Like Anglo Saxon England's...

I was going to what would have been a somewhat long response, but rather than that, have a listen to:

Again, way off topic, so I won't go into details, but as a sort of overview, the so-called "list of nations" in verses 9-11 is just that; a list of geographical places. Specifically, the lands of the Diaspora (both Eastern and Western). It is not a list of languages. In fact, nowhere in the...

“Ok, explain how "original languages" prove an error in any bible." I'll give a few quick examples - "If you have HEARING, these verses are telling us EXACTLY how God preserved his word from the day of Pentecost forward. The wonderful works of God is the bible. Act 2:4 And they were all...

With all due respect, the KJV is riddled with mistranslations and has errors just like any other translated version. That's just fact. From the start, the King James Bible was intended to be not a literary creation, but rather a political and theological compromise between the established church...

Typically, if I'm researching something, I'll end up using several versions (depending on what I'm looking at/for), some not in English (Luther's German Bible, Coptic, Syriac, Old Church Slavonic, etc.), but ultimately, if it's the NT, I usually end up seeing how these translations compare to...