Speaking in tongues

[garee]

Paul contrasts praying with tongues with praying with his mind. There is something else going on here besides speaking naturally and normally in a foreign language.

Praying or communicating using his own language using his mind as if it was the mind of Christ in respect to the words the Holy Spirit supernaturally put on his lips . All prophecy is supernatural .

Not seeing your point or what that has to do with confirming the sign as to who it applies to and the reasoning according to the law.

 

[garee]

Hopefully if he sees his own words, he'll pause and think through his position.

I am still focusing on the law as to the sign. What does the sign confirm and to whom? Believers, or those who believe not prophecy in any language?

 

[garee]

Show us please. Thanks.

You would have to see the water for the show, as telling or revealing. Show and tell.

No outward show for those who believe God just a changing heart that God looks into as he works to make it soft. With prophecy its show as telling. Or believing as prophecy gives us the faith is seeing .

It would seem that those who seek after a signs and wonders gospel come from Missouri as that state of show me mind set. But with tongues another outward sign if we look to what the sign confirms and who it is identified with .I think we should be more careful on how we can hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Rather than this oral tradition called tongues of some men or water baptism. an old testament ceremonial law introducing a new priest into the kingdom of priest/ kings .

Not a new testament foundation as a sign to confirm. But rather a shadow of a inward desire.

 

[garee]

Conflating tongues and prophecy is an effective way of making the word of God to no effect by going above what is written.

It would seem that you are the one who is trying to say prophecy and the sign of tongues that points to those who rebel and refuse prophecy in any language are conflating as if it was all one thing, as a sign someone believed. the two are not one. God does not mock those who believe prophecy.

The Jew who God identifies with a sign in effect turn the tradition of God upside down and make it a oral tradition of men taking away the understanding of God like all oral traditions of men.

Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

A work of the unbelieving Jew (no faith) mocking God in the process.

Jeremiah 44 King James Version (KJV) As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

 

[Dino246]

It would seem that you are the one who is trying to say prophecy and the sign of tongues that points to those who rebel and refuse prophecy in any language are conflating as if it was all one thing, as a sign someone believed. the two are not one.

I honestly don't understand what you're getting at above. Did you make up a meaning for "conflate"? It means "treat two distinct things as though they are one thing". I've been telling you for almost 200 pages that tongues and prophecy are not the same thing, per 1 Cor 14.

God does not mock those who believe prophecy. ... The Jew who God identifies with a sign in effect turn the tradition of God upside down and make it a oral tradition of men taking away the understanding of God like all oral traditions of men.

How does any of this make sense in light of Acts 10 and 19? Cornelius was a Gentile who spoke in tongues in the presence of already-redeemed Jews. Your repeated reference to the prophecy of stammering lips makes no sense in light of this event.

 

[bygrace]

I honestly don't understand what you're getting at above. Did you make up a meaning for "conflate"? It means "treat two distinct things as though they are one thing". I've been telling you for almost 200 pages that tongues and prophecy are not the same thing, per 1 Cor 14.


How does any of this make sense in light of Acts 10 and 19? Cornelius was a Gentile who spoke in tongues in the presence of already-redeemed Jews. Your repeated reference to the prophecy of stammering lips makes no sense in light of this event.

Dino garee has not understood of 1cor prophesy nor can he.

 

[cv5]

Show us please. Thanks.

Some salient points to be understood here...….

 

[bygrace]

in the greek.

Some salient points to be understood here...….

his issue is with foolishness which has been addressed. the issue I have is one who uses pagan practices to explain or discredit 1cor chapters 12 to 14. the other sad thing is the blanket attachment to the term charismatics which he should just say he has issues with those Catholic ones because of the term charismatic is one taken from the word of God to describe the gifts of the Holy Spirit which were spoken in Mark 16 and in 1cor 12 to 14. I was preached my need for salvation ever before I was taught about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit known as the Charismata or pneumatika in the Greek.

 

[garee]

I honestly don't understand what you're getting at above. Did you make up a meaning for "conflate"? It means "treat two distinct things as though they are one thing". I've been telling you for almost 200 pages that tongues and prophecy are not the same thing, per 1 Cor 14.

The foundation for the doctrine that many refuse to look at is found in the old testemtment. Its not a new testament principle' make a noise and that confirms something? The theme all the way through is... yet for all that "they will not hear" the Holy Spirit. (no prophecy in any language)


For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Isiah 28:11-14

Tongues is simply God bringing new revelations as prophecy in all the languages of the world and no longer Hebrew alone.

Yes the sign that confirms those who believe not prophecy and those who hear prophecy by which men can believe God are two different things. Why conflate them as if it was all one and the same .

We can try again what does the sign of stammering lips confirm those who believe not prophecy or those who do??

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corinthians 14:21 -22

How does any of this make sense in light of Acts 10 and 19? Cornelius was a Gentile who spoke in tongues in the presence of already-redeemed Jews. Your repeated reference to the prophecy of stammering lips makes no sense in light of this event.

Cornelius spoke prophecy as God put his words on mouth Cornelius. The redeemed Jews believed God .The ones the sign pointed did not believe prophecy

It was not a sign in respect to those who believe prophecy like the believing Jew but against those who rather did whatsoever their own mouths as in Jerimiah 44.

By inflating the two as if it was all the same thing .things get turned upside down and takes away the understanding that comes from prophecy .Gods understanding.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

 

[bygrace]

The foundation for the doctrine that many refuse to look at is found in the old testemtment. Its not a new testament principle' make a noise and that confirms something? The theme all the way through is... yet for all that "they will not hear" the Holy Spirit. (no prophecy in any language)


For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Isiah 28:11-14

Tongues is simply God bringing new revelations as prophecy in all the languages of the world and no longer Hebrew alone.

Yes the sign that confirms those who believe not prophecy and those who hear prophecy by which men can believe God are two different things. Why conflate them as if it was all one and the same .

We can try again what does the sign of stammering lips confirm those who believe not prophecy or those who do??

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corinthians 14:21 -22



Cornelius spoke prophecy as God put his words on mouth Cornelius. The redeemed Jews believed God .The ones the sign pointed did not believe prophecy

It was not a sign in respect to those who believe prophecy like the believing Jew but against those who rather did whatsoever their own mouths as in Jerimiah 44.

By inflating the two as if it was all the same thing .things get turned upside down and takes away the understanding that comes from prophecy .Gods understanding.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

wrong

 

[garee]

in the greek.
his issue is with foolishness which has been addressed. the issue I have is one who uses pagan practices to explain or discredit 1cor chapters 12 to 14. the other sad thing is the blanket attachment to the term charismatics which he should just say he has issues with those Catholic ones because of the term charismatic is one taken from the word of God to describe the gifts of the Holy Spirit which were spoken in Mark 16 and in 1cor 12 to 14. I was preached my need for salvation ever before I was taught about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit known as the Charismata or pneumatika in the Greek.

I also was preached in the same way with words that have meaning attached to them. And not vain repetitions with no meanings.

So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. 1 Cor. 14: 9

Prophecy is easy to undersatnd

The term charismatic is an oral tradition of men not taken from the word of God in the same way being slain in the Spirit, or Holy laughter .New sign innovations coming all the time or drinking poison and it will not harm a person .

If all who claim tongue as a sign to confirm they are with God if they would take the next confirming step the snake bite test .I think we know the results.

It has nothing to do with Catholics but everything to do who with a oral traditions of men that make the word of God without effect as the pagan practices of men.

No one is trying to discredit prophecy or any gift.

Why do you give credit to a sign that confirms those who refuse to believe prophecy.?

Look at the law in verses 21 and 22 it easy to see what it confirms and who the sign is against. And clearly does not support.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

 

[KJV1611]

The foundation for the doctrine that many refuse to look at is found in the old testemtment. Its not a new testament principle' make a noise and that confirms something? The theme all the way through is... yet for all that "they will not hear" the Holy Spirit. (no prophecy in any language)


For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Isiah 28:11-14

Tongues is simply God bringing new revelations as prophecy in all the languages of the world and no longer Hebrew alone.

Yes the sign that confirms those who believe not prophecy and those who hear prophecy by which men can believe God are two different things. Why conflate them as if it was all one and the same .

We can try again what does the sign of stammering lips confirm those who believe not prophecy or those who do??

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corinthians 14:21 -22



Cornelius spoke prophecy as God put his words on mouth Cornelius. The redeemed Jews believed God .The ones the sign pointed did not believe prophecy

It was not a sign in respect to those who believe prophecy like the believing Jew but against those who rather did whatsoever their own mouths as in Jerimiah 44.

By inflating the two as if it was all the same thing .things get turned upside down and takes away the understanding that comes from prophecy .Gods understanding.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

I agree with most of that... I think lol. I think you are trying to say that tongues serves two purposes:

1) As sign to the Jews that God was going to the gentiles and using a multitude of languages when he did it. When the New Testament was written, the believing Jews recognized the prophecy ("with another tongue...") and realized they were in that time when God would change the language of the scripture. BUT the unbelieving Jews didn't get it. So tongues is a SIGN to them that believe not, it makes them guilty because God told them it was coming and they didn't recognize it.

2) Tongues is the method God chose to bring his word to all people of the world in their language. This is why Paul said - For if any man speak in an unknown tongue (Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic), let it be by two (Hebrew and Aramaic) or at the most three (Greek) and let ONE (God) interpret.

This is what I believe, is this what you were trying to say?

 

[garee]

wrong

Its easy to solve. What does the sign confirm and to who is is applied?

Below is the law involving prophecy not subject to change .

Which master….. One or two? Cant serve two teaching masters can we ?

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 1 corinthians14:21-22

1) not to those that believe prophecy?
2) those who believe not prophecy?

 

[bygrace]

I also was preached in the same way with words that have meaning attached to them. And not vain repetitions with no meanings.

So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. 1 Cor. 14: 9

Prophecy is easy to undersatnd

The term charismatic is an oral tradition of men not taken from the word of God in the same way being slain in the Spirit, or Holy laughter .New sign innovations coming all the time or drinking poison and it will not harm a person .

If all who claim tongue as a sign to confirm they are with God if they would take the next confirming step the snake bite test .I think we know the results.

It has nothing to do with Catholics but everything to do who with a oral traditions of men that make the word of God without effect as the pagan practices of men.

No one is trying to discredit prophecy or any gift.

Why do you give credit to a sign that confirms those who refuse to believe prophecy.?

Look at the law in verses 21 and 22 it easy to see what it confirms and who the sign is against. And clearly does not support.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

well, you are wrong. the term Charismatic is in direct context to the Greek word Charismata which means spiritual power the term Charismatics are those who identify with the biblical empowerment gifts. You are bias and clearly unlearned in this. Why do you attack what you do not know? No one is as you suggest " give credit to a sign that confirms those who refuse to believe prophecy". That is your own bias and unbiblical one too.

 

[garee]

I agree with most of that... I think lol. I think you are trying to say that tongues serves two purposes:

1) As sign to the Jews that God was going to the gentiles and using a multitude of languages when he did it. When the New Testament was written, the believing Jews recognized the prophecy ("with another tongue...") and realized they were in that time when God would change the language of the scripture. BUT the unbelieving Jews didn't get it. So tongues is a SIGN to them that believe not, it makes them guilty because God told them it was coming and they didn't recognize it.

2) Tongues is the method God chose to bring his word to all people of the world in their language. This is why Paul said - For if any man speak in an unknown tongue (Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic), let it be by two (Hebrew and Aramaic) or at the most three (Greek) and let ONE (God) interpret.

This is what I believe, is this what you were trying to say?

I would agree .Nice way of explaining, thanks

 

[bygrace]

Its easy to solve. What does the sign confirm and to who is is applied?

Below is the law involving prophecy not subject to change .

Which master….. One or two? Cant serve two teaching masters can we ?

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 1 corinthians14:21-22

1) not to those that believe prophecy?
2) those who believe not prophecy?

again you are unlearned in the word of God. 1cor chapter 14:21-22 is not the full context. You circle your wagon around your bias. You use only two verses to explain three chapters which were written contextually together. You are trying to nail jello to the wall. you allegorize and have a bazaar fixation on what you think is prophecy yet lack understanding in prophesying why?

 

[KJV1611]

Some salient points to be understood here...….

You've got to be kidding... this is the guy who says Christians can take the mark of the beast during the tribulation and still get saved. Do you believe that too?

 

[bygrace]

I agree with most of that... I think lol. I think you are trying to say that tongues serves two purposes:

1) As sign to the Jews that God was going to the gentiles and using a multitude of languages when he did it. When the New Testament was written, the believing Jews recognized the prophecy ("with another tongue...") and realized they were in that time when God would change the language of the scripture. BUT the unbelieving Jews didn't get it. So tongues is a SIGN to them that believe not, it makes them guilty because God told them it was coming and they didn't recognize it.

2) Tongues is the method God chose to bring his word to all people of the world in their language. This is why Paul said - For if any man speak in an unknown tongue (Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic), let it be by two (Hebrew and Aramaic) or at the most three (Greek) and let ONE (God) interpret.

This is what I believe, is this what you were trying to say?

the problem here is the context of 1cor 12 to 14. If there was no chapter 12 you would have a point. the reason for the gifts all of them including tongues is right there in chapter 12. They are supernature gifts as the Greek context says they are. You cannot look at chapter 13 or 14 to discredit chapter 12. IN the Book of Acts Tongues were a sign. which led to those coming to the Lord. The end result of Acts was not tongues it was the preaching and salvation of 3000. The end result of 1cor 12 to 14 is not the removal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit but the edification of the body.

 

[bygrace]

You've got to be kidding... this is the guy who says Christians can take the mark of the beast during the tribulation and still get saved. Do you believe that too?

he is correct because he said so LOL hahaha.

 

[KJV1611]

the problem here is the context of 1cor 12 to 14. If there was no chapter 12 you would have a point. the reason for the gifts all of them including tongues is right there in chapter 12. They are supernature gifts as the Greek context says they are. You cannot look at chapter 13 or 14 to discredit chapter 12. IN the Book of Acts Tongues were a sign. which led to those coming to the Lord. The end result of Acts was not tongues it was the preaching and salvation of 3000. The end result of 1cor 12 to 14 is not the removal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit but the edification of the body.

1Co 14:27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Those verses say that if any MAN (not group of men) speak in an unknown tongue let it be by two (unknown tongues, not men).

If the passage were talking about two or three men speaking in tongues then verse 28 would have said let THEM keep silence in the church, and let THEM speak to themselves.

I still believe tongues is a gift that's alive and being used today, but I don't think the Charismatic version is it. And what I gave to Garee was a very simplified version of what I really believe. I believe the true unknown tongue is the word of God that's hidden in the symbolic language of the bible.

The true meaning of the bible is hidden in the parables and symbolism... I don't look down or judge anyone who interprets the parables or symbols differently than I do. I've been wrong in my understanding before and I'm sure I'll be wrong again, but hey, it's a journey!