Speaking in tongues

[garee]

There isn't a single use of the Greek word translated "edifies" that is negative; 1 Corinthians 14:2 notwithstanding.

Do the homework and stop promoting error based on your own private interpretation.

Thanks for the reply.

Keeping in mind the foundation of we are looking at. It is found in Isiah 28 . Its easy to slip away from things that have no interest. Been there done that lived there.

Remember a sign that reveals those will not hear the word of God prophecy (Jerimiah 44:16-17) but rather do whatsoever their own mouths says, after the oral traditions of men as in self edifying, self righteous, self pride . Some turn that upside down as if things were inspired from earth and it should be edified as the things we see.(no faith)

Note ….(purple in parenthesis) my offering

1 Corinthians 14:1-6 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
Pursue the love, and seek earnestly the spiritual things, (not seen) and rather that ye may prophecy, for he who is speaking in an tongue -- to men he doth not speak, but to God, for no one doth hearken, and in spirit (not seen) he doth speak secrets; and he who is prophesying to men doth speak edification, and exhortation, and comfort he who is speaking in an tongue, himself doth edify (self edification ), and he who is prophesying, an assembly doth edify;(God)and I wish you all to speak with tongues, and more that ye may prophecy, for greater is he who is prophesying than he who is speaking with tongues, except one may interpret, that the assembly may receive edification. And now, brethren, if I may come unto you speaking tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either in revelation, or in knowledge, or in prophesying, or in teaching?

Jesus is the "active "spirit of prophecy" as the living word our preacher or teacher. We preach Christ not our own selves, We are not have that work that he works in us in respect to the prophets as apostles sent by God not see and venerate or edify men seen.

The Spirit of prophecy edifying it own self "he who is speaking in an tongue,himself doth edify" not that which he is working in to both will and do his good pleasure as if he was served by human hands.

 

[garee]

The Church Authorities (Peter and John (Acts 8) and then Peter and a number of Jewish believers (Acts 10) ) WERE called to settle the matter of the Holy Spirit being gifted to the Samaritans and Gentiles.

I see no reason why the Church Authorities would not be involved in the matter of the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in sign gifts today. No reason at all.

I don't think the word of God would encourage the idea of walking by sight as to what are called "sign gifts" .And not encourage the spiritual (unseen gifts) walking by faith .(the unseen eternal)

I think if we can settle the matter as to the foundation of the spiritual gift tongues (God brining new revelations in multiple languages and no longer Hebrew alone). The we can see what it confirms and why it was given..... getting to the core of the matter.. And not what some think is the frosting .

Peter could of been involved in a tongue conversation ( double translation) with the Italian guy. That is if they both spoke different languages and God would need to interpret for both . Interesting the Holy Spirit sends a gentile as a apostle to give the spiritual understanding hid to another apostle Peter

 

[garee]

This forum is an interesting place.
God is disagreeing with himself constantly.
I wonder what it means.

LOL perhaps that you are not God?

 

[cv5]

I don't think the word of God would encourage the idea of walking by sight as to what are called "sign gifts" .And not encourage the spiritual (unseen gifts) walking by faith .(the unseen eternal)

I think if we can settle the matter as to the foundation of the spiritual gift tongues (God brining new revelations in multiple languages and no longer Hebrew alone). The we can see what it confirms and why it was given..... getting to the core of the matter.. And not what some think is the frosting .

Peter could of been involved in a tongue conversation ( double translation) with the Italian guy. That is if they both spoke different languages and God would need to interpret for both . Interesting the Holy Spirit sends a gentile as a apostle to give the spiritual understanding hid to another apostle Peter

Sorry. Wrong. Both of these incidents were obviously prearranged in order that the Church Authorities duly record the phenomenon....for posterity on the record and for our benefit. Same goes for Act Ch 2.....this was clearly observed, recorded and logged into the database.

Multiple explanations and interpretations are wholly unnecessary.

 

[Deade]

No no no.
1) The tongues incidents supposedly going on today simply need to be recorded. The veracity will be confirmed......easily.
2) I am not seeking after a sign. I am disputing that the tongues sign gifts are occurring as the Pentecostals proclaim they are.

I am never seeking after a sign. Ever. I know that the signs miracles and wonders did in fact occur, and if God chooses to reassert that phenomenon so be it. Not my business.
Furthermore, I am perfectly willing to be a candidate FOR sign gifts. It would be an honor.

I am simply refuting the BOGUS claims of tongues, not the genuine ones. [\QUOTE]

You seem to be refuting all tongues today. Please clarify what you are saying in the red highlighted line?

Easily. A scrupulous investigation will yield dependable results. But the sample size could be limited to Latin languages if necessary.

Parsing words is not useful if they are used to evade the facts or the question.

Again I say, the Acts ch 2 gold standard is the test, and I want to see manifestation of tongues that meet this standard. Very simple request. And very very easily met....if in fact tongues today are legitimate.

And yes, I do acknowledge that it is CERTAINLY possible for legitimate tongues to be manifested today. But what the Pentecostals proclaim are legitimate tongues occurring on a daily basis at Pentecostal assemblies all over the world is absurd. Why? There would be infallible proof. The entire world would know as well. Why? Because that is the main purpose of "sign gifts". They authenticate the true God, and the true Church.

What makes you think you can verify something you do not understand. Prayer tongues are said to be a heavenly language; no earthly standards exist.

The Church Authorities (Peter and John (Acts 8) and then Peter and a number of Jewish believers (Acts 10) ) WERE called to settle the matter of the Holy Spirit being gifted to the Samaritans and Gentiles.

I see no reason why the Church Authorities would not be involved in the matter of the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in sign gifts today. No reason at all.

Just whom do we report to as authority over our Church matters. I recognize no authority over my faith but me. If I align fully with anyone, I quit following God.

 

[cv5]

Can't love a Gnostic. Or a false prophet for that matter.....and there are too many of those too.

 

[cv5]

Can't love a Gnostic. Or a false prophet for that matter.....and there are too many of those too.

Well.....we need to love them so they might come around and convert. God willing. Unfortunately you are stuck in another pitched battle to insure that leaven does not ruin your own children. What a mess life in this present age really is. I for one am sick of it.

 

[Sketch]

LOL perhaps that you are not God?

No worries, I was clear on that point.

 

[Dino246]

Thanks for the reply.

Keeping in mind the foundation of we are looking at. It is found in Isiah 28 . Its easy to slip away from things that have no interest. Been there done that lived there.

Remember a sign that reveals those will not hear the word of God prophecy (Jerimiah 44:16-17) but rather do whatsoever their own mouths says, after the oral traditions of men as in self edifying, self righteous, self pride . Some turn that upside down as if things were inspired from earth and it should be edified as the things we see.(no faith)

Note ….(purple in parenthesis) my offering

1 Corinthians 14:1-6 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
Pursue the love, and seek earnestly the spiritual things, (not seen) and rather that ye may prophecy, for he who is speaking in an tongue -- to men he doth not speak, but to God, for no one doth hearken, and in spirit (not seen) he doth speak secrets; and he who is prophesying to men doth speak edification, and exhortation, and comfort he who is speaking in an tongue, himself doth edify (self edification ), and he who is prophesying, an assembly doth edify;(God)and I wish you all to speak with tongues, and more that ye may prophecy, for greater is he who is prophesying than he who is speaking with tongues, except one may interpret, that the assembly may receive edification. And now, brethren, if I may come unto you speaking tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either in revelation, or in knowledge, or in prophesying, or in teaching?

Jesus is the "active "spirit of prophecy" as the living word our preacher or teacher. We preach Christ not our own selves, We are not have that work that he works in us in respect to the prophets as apostles sent by God not see and venerate or edify men seen.

The Spirit of prophecy edifying it own self "he who is speaking in an tongue,himself doth edify" not that which he is working in to both will and do his good pleasure as if he was served by human hands.

You're still assuming without evidence that self-edification is a bad thing. You haven't come anywhere near proving it. Your reasoning is circular and your argument is invalid.

 

[presidente]

Easily. A scrupulous investigation will yield dependable results. But the sample size could be limited to Latin languages if necessary.

This is not a rational conclusion. There are over 6000 languages used in the world today. How many Romance Languages are there? A dozen or so?

Paul describes what happens when one speaks in tongues in church, 'no man understandeth him.' That's why it needs to be interpreted. Why would we normally expect tongues be in the language of those present? There are many accounts of it happening, but over all it is rare.

Again I say, the Acts ch 2 gold standard is the test, and I want to see manifestation of tongues that meet this standard. Very simple request. And very very easily met....if in fact tongues today are legitimate.

And yes, I do acknowledge that it is CERTAINLY possible for legitimate tongues to be manifested today. But what the Pentecostals proclaim are legitimate tongues occurring on a daily basis at Pentecostal assemblies all over the world is absurd. Why? There would be infallible proof. The entire world would know as well. Why? Because that is the main purpose of "sign gifts". They authenticate the true God, and the true Church.

That would work if you can make the Holy Spirit jump through your proverbial hoops or if he is having you do these things.

Tongues as a sign has to do with 'and yet for all that, they will not hear me.' The unbeliever who comes into church and hears all speaking in tongues may say 'ye are mad.' Even on Pentecost, there were scoffers who thought those who spoke in tongues were drunk.

Do you believe God heals the sick through prayer? Does every atheist believe that? If not, does that mean God does not heal the sick through prayer?

 

[presidente]

I am quite sure MacArthur did his due diligence on that section of scripture. I have listened to his exegesis on the matter in depth and detail and many times over. I tend to believe he is correct in his assertions. As I said this is a tough nut to crack.

Answer me this. If the tongues the Corinthians were speaking in were pagan gibberish, how would interpreting them edify the congregation as Paul taught in I Corinthians 14. Why woudl Paul want pagan gibberish interpreted?

If the tongues the Corinthians were speaking in in I Corinthians 14 were pagan gibberish instead of the gift described in chapter 12, why would Paul write, "I would that ye all spake with tongues"? Why would Paul want them to speak in pagan gibberish?

If edification in the passage refers to puffing up one's ego, why does Paul exhort the Corinthians to excel to the edification of the church in chapter 12? Why must all things be done unto edifying in verse 26? Why is edifying bad in one verse, and good in the next?

Clearly, the man did not do his due diligence or if he tried, lacked the ability to perceive. This is an old sermon. I don't know if it is before he started the verse by verse thing. I do not see how this nonsense could stand up under a verse by verse exposition.

This type of interpretation makes sense if you think Paul was wrong and that the scriptures weren't inspired. Paul would be wrong about the interpretation edifying the church. Gifts of the Spirit would be made out ot be just the same thing the pagans did.

And of course, his history is bad, or at least unsubstantiated. A first century witness who worked as a priest at the temple of Delphi indicates the Oracle of Delphi who worked there spoke in intelligible language. He defended prose pagan prophesies, and the idea that pagan prophecies did not have to be in high poetry.

Using the Oracle of Delphi as some sort of exegetical key to interpret the scriptures does not make much sense anyway.

If they were, it would be investigated and understood by Church authorities to be true and thusly proclaimed from the pulpit. There would be little to debate.

Are you aware that many preachers in pulpits do teach that speaking in tongues is a legitimate gift practiced today?

 

[presidente]

Hello. I said that the footage would be sent out for analysis by a qualified professional if necessary.
Furthermore an investigation into the facts of the incident if necessary.

I would still like your input so I can tell about the words I posted.

 

[presidente]

Falling back on ".. could be an idiom..." is more than bizaar and has no basis.

Do you have anything else? otherwise have a great day.

'gathered to his people' is clearly an idiom. It's meaning is something other than the exact words in the phrase. It's probably not that far removed from the wording. Another passage says, Genesis 49:29 I [Jacob] am about to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite.

The dead bodies go to the place where other dead bodies go, even if not in the same tomb. They go in the ground. At least, that's what Hebrews did with corpses, putting them in caves and tombs, but still in the ground and not out in the open.

Your interpretation has these people being scattered-- the opposite of gathered. It has their spirit getting scattered.

There is no reason to redefine 'caught up' the way you do. There is no reason to think that the Biblical authors held to the theories that you conclude from the problems you think you see in the text for more traditional views.

Verses about Paul experiencing death while physically alive was not proof that his spirit was going to be distributed among the saints. Does anyone else read the Bible and see these ideas, for example, about the spirit of a saint being distributed among other people?

 

[presidente]

I am not dismissing a language I do not know. I am doing just the opposite. Confirming a language that we DO know. Then a very simple interrogation and investigation will be able to determine if the SPEAKER knew the language.

Here is an analogy. One scientist claims there is 'quick silver', globs of mercury on the ocean floor. Another scientists hires a diver, has him scoop up a shovel full of sand from the ocean floor. He plans to test it. If there is no mercury in it, he will tell the other scientist that he has proven that his quick silver claims are false. What is wrong with the scientific methodology in this experiment?

 

[PS]

Easily. A scrupulous investigation will yield dependable results. But the sample size could be limited to Latin languages if necessary.

Parsing words is not useful if they are used to evade the facts or the question.

Again I say, the Acts ch 2 gold standard is the test, and I want to see manifestation of tongues that meet this standard. Very simple request. And very very easily met....if in fact tongues today are legitimate.

And yes, I do acknowledge that it is CERTAINLY possible for legitimate tongues to be manifested today. But what the Pentecostals proclaim are legitimate tongues occurring on a daily basis at Pentecostal assemblies all over the world is absurd. Why? There would be infallible proof. The entire world would know as well. Why? Because that is the main purpose of "sign gifts". They authenticate the true God, and the true Church.

What about the Heavenly Language?

 

[Noose]

'gathered to his people' is clearly an idiom. It's meaning is something other than the exact words in the phrase. It's probably not that far removed from the wording. Another passage says, Genesis 49:29 I [Jacob] am about to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite.

The dead bodies go to the place where other dead bodies go, even if not in the same tomb. They go in the ground. At least, that's what Hebrews did with corpses, putting them in caves and tombs, but still in the ground and not out in the open.

Your interpretation has these people being scattered-- the opposite of gathered. It has their spirit getting scattered.

There is no reason to redefine 'caught up' the way you do. There is no reason to think that the Biblical authors held to the theories that you conclude from the problems you think you see in the text for more traditional views.

Verses about Paul experiencing death while physically alive was not proof that his spirit was going to be distributed among the saints. Does anyone else read the Bible and see these ideas, for example, about the spirit of a saint being distributed among other people?

There's no idiom in the phrase "..die and be gathered to your people..". It is not the body that is gathered but the spirit- the body will return to dust where it came from. As much as Jacob said he will be gathered to his people, it was still the word of God- he was inspired to say that.

If gathering is only an idiom for mourning, then Jesus only mourns the elect when it is said He will gather them from the four corners.

You are the one who redefines 'caught up' with your 'traditional view', Paul said he will die, be raised and be caught up with his listeners at Corinth. If what Paul said is true, then it actually happened, no need to redefine this by saying it was symbolic or an idiom; if it was symbolic then, it should be symbolic in the end of age- why do you believe it will happen in the end of age when Paul said it will happen in the 1st century?

Paul also told Thessalonians that those that have died will be raised and be caught up with those among them that were alive. If this is true it happened, there's no need to redefine and say it will happen in the end of age, there will be no Thessalonians in the end.

Group mentality doesn't work when it comes to understanding the bible, it leads many to the ditch.

 

[Noose]

'gathered to his people' is clearly an idiom. It's meaning is something other than the exact words in the phrase. It's probably not that far removed from the wording. Another passage says, Genesis 49:29 I [Jacob] am about to be gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite.

The dead bodies go to the place where other dead bodies go, even if not in the same tomb. They go in the ground. At least, that's what Hebrews did with corpses, putting them in caves and tombs, but still in the ground and not out in the open.

Your interpretation has these people being scattered-- the opposite of gathered. It has their spirit getting scattered.

There is no reason to redefine 'caught up' the way you do. There is no reason to think that the Biblical authors held to the theories that you conclude from the problems you think you see in the text for more traditional views.

Verses about Paul experiencing death while physically alive was not proof that his spirit was going to be distributed among the saints. Does anyone else read the Bible and see these ideas, for example, about the spirit of a saint being distributed among other people?

1 Cor 15:29Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

The people that were baptizing for the dead- what do you think was their underlying belief? why would anyone baptize for the dead?

Paul used their practice to support his resurrection teaching clearly conforming that the practice was justified. There can only be two underlying beliefs and i will want you help me choose the correct one:

A. They believed saints will be resurrected in the very end (end of age) so they baptized people in the name of the saints (who they couldn't know because there are so many saints after 1st century)

B. They believed the OT saints would be resurrected in their time and indwell them and for that reason they baptized people in the name of the OT saints.

 

[cv5]

Answer me this. If the tongues the Corinthians were speaking in were pagan gibberish, how would interpreting them edify the congregation as Paul taught in I Corinthians 14. Why woudl Paul want pagan gibberish interpreted?

If the tongues the Corinthians were speaking in in I Corinthians 14 were pagan gibberish instead of the gift described in chapter 12, why would Paul write, "I would that ye all spake with tongues"? Why would Paul want them to speak in pagan gibberish?

If edification in the passage refers to puffing up one's ego, why does Paul exhort the Corinthians to excel to the edification of the church in chapter 12? Why must all things be done unto edifying in verse 26? Why is edifying bad in one verse, and good in the next?

Clearly, the man did not do his due diligence or if he tried, lacked the ability to perceive. This is an old sermon. I don't know if it is before he started the verse by verse thing. I do not see how this nonsense could stand up under a verse by verse exposition.

This type of interpretation makes sense if you think Paul was wrong and that the scriptures weren't inspired. Paul would be wrong about the interpretation edifying the church. Gifts of the Spirit would be made out ot be just the same thing the pagans did.

And of course, his history is bad, or at least unsubstantiated. A first century witness who worked as a priest at the temple of Delphi indicates the Oracle of Delphi who worked there spoke in intelligible language. He defended prose pagan prophesies, and the idea that pagan prophecies did not have to be in high poetry.

Using the Oracle of Delphi as some sort of exegetical key to interpret the scriptures does not make much sense anyway.




Are you aware that many preachers in pulpits do teach that speaking in tongues is a legitimate gift practiced today?

Tongues IS a legitimate gift no doubt about that. And if the legitimate gift is working today, then they should be known to be true BEYOND REFUTATION as they were in the early Church.

So my requirement for a test per the Act ch 2 standard is not asking too much. Not at all.
In fact my request for video and analysis is the MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

Just upload the video people. I will take care of the rest and any costs for analysis will be paid by me.

Thus far all that I have seen and heard is evasion, tip-toeing around the issue, and attempts at biblical obfuscation and smokescreens.

Just upload the video/audio footage. There must be thousands and millions of incidents per day according the Pentecostals, so easy peasy.

 

[garee]

1 Cor 15:29Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

The people that were baptizing for the dead- what do you think was their underlying belief? why would anyone baptize for the dead?

Paul used their practice to support his resurrection teaching clearly conforming that the practice was justified. There can only be two underlying beliefs and i will want you help me choose the correct one:

A. They believed saints will be resurrected in the very end (end of age) so they baptized people in the name of the saints (who they couldn't know because there are so many saints after 1st century)

B. They believed the OT saints would be resurrected in their time and indwell them and for that reason they baptized people in the name of the OT saints.

What do you think to baptize for the dead means?

Why would anyone baptize in the name of a saint. Was Paul crucified for the sin of the world?

Why not two resurrections .One when Christ said it is finished and the other at the end of the age?

 

[garee]

You're still assuming without evidence that self-edification is a bad thing. You haven't come anywhere near proving it. Your reasoning is circular and your argument is invalid.

Self edification is self righteousness /self righteousness is self edification

All arguments as laws and not theories go around and around. Philosophical theories are subject to change.

Why would a person venerate his own self for the work another performs in them?

What is it they would have that was not freely given to them by God who is not served by human hands. And if it was given to them why would they edify their own self as if it was not given?