A NON-CHARISMATIC UNDERSTANDING OF TONGUES
- Thread starter VCO
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
U
It seems to me that your logic proofs do not really matter since the onus is on those who believe that glossolalia is "language" to prove that it is..........and no one has been able to do so, I am referring to the glossolalia presently done in churches.
The evidence is far, far higher that it is not a language
How does one prove unintelligible speech is language?
The argument that "it is spiritual" and science does not apply is a cope out to me, since it can only come from someone who does not understand or accept the science much like flat earthers
I find it baffling...I really wish someone could make a sound argument why they think it is language?
The evidence is far, far higher that it is not a language
How does one prove unintelligible speech is language?
The argument that "it is spiritual" and science does not apply is a cope out to me, since it can only come from someone who does not understand or accept the science much like flat earthers
I find it baffling...I really wish someone could make a sound argument why they think it is language?
-
1
- Show all
I haven't set out to "prove" logically that glossolalia is language. I have, however, demonstrated that many of the arguments against it being a language are logically fallacious and therefore invalid.
That's an opinion followed by a double fallacy. The first is colloquially called "No True Scotsman" and the second is guilt by association.
That's an opinion followed by a double fallacy. The first is colloquially called "No True Scotsman" and the second is guilt by association.
U
G
LOL..... I've had a very similar experience with some "Name it and Claim it Prosperity" friends of mine. They tried real hard to teach me how to "mouth" the words and said, "It's easy, all it takes is practice...." But the more I objected the more they accused me of "Harboring a spirit of hindrance."
-
2
-
1
-
1
- Show all
G
As an outsider to the U.S.A. I notice that much of Christian worship and doctrine is peculiar to America.
And this certainly applies to much of the charismatic Pentecostal churches I have seen on various TV channels and on YouTube.
BUT what you need to experience is Bible obedient disciplined Pentecost worship that is not out of order and preaches sound
doctrine. Fortunately, Australia is home to the largest Bible disciplined Pentecostal church around - no hoo-haa, non-charismatic,
no music based entertainment replacing preaching the word: and the gifts of tongues, interpretation and prophecy all conducted
decently in order according to scripture: !Corinthians 14.
Lucky for you we have an assembly in Fresno, California that also complies with the word of God and conducts itself properly:
feel free to check them out -
https://trffresno.org/
Nick
And this certainly applies to much of the charismatic Pentecostal churches I have seen on various TV channels and on YouTube.
BUT what you need to experience is Bible obedient disciplined Pentecost worship that is not out of order and preaches sound
doctrine. Fortunately, Australia is home to the largest Bible disciplined Pentecostal church around - no hoo-haa, non-charismatic,
no music based entertainment replacing preaching the word: and the gifts of tongues, interpretation and prophecy all conducted
decently in order according to scripture: !Corinthians 14.
Lucky for you we have an assembly in Fresno, California that also complies with the word of God and conducts itself properly:
feel free to check them out -
https://trffresno.org/
Nick
-
1
- Show all
I can appreciate that you aren't a beginner in logic. After all, you did manage to employ two fallacies in one sentence.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
-
1
- Show all
Of course, the Bible is good enough for me VCO, don't need to learn Ecstatic Utterances. I would rather learned "speaking with tongues" just like Apostle Paul did. he spake not only Greek but also Hebrew, Aramaic and some say he had spoken Latin and probably have known/idea about English!
just like Apostle Paul did. he spake not only Greek but also Hebrew, Aramaic and some say he had spoken Latin and probably have known/idea about English!-
1
- Show all
WOW, and they never even suspected that they themselves are in a FALSE DOCRTINE of tongues speaking. You can not learn to speak in tongues, that is a FALSE GIFT. If GOD INTENDED TO GIVE A PERSON GENUINE SPIRITUAL TONGUES, HE DOES THE MIRACLE THROUGH YOU.
Look at this verse:
Mark 16:20 (HCSB)
20 And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word by the accompanying signs.
See it, the LORD is the one WORKING THE MIRACLES including the MIRACLE OF TONGUES.
-
1
- Show all
U
I can appreciate that you aren't a beginner in logic. After all, you did manage to employ two fallacies in one sentence.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
I am speaking to empirical data not philosophy, this is the piece you keep missing
It is not language, so what is it then?
You accuse me later of "missing" something, and yet here you seem to have missed my point completely.
Those are your words, not mine.
I'm not missing it at all. I understand perfectly well what you're saying. To draw a parallel, I'm saying that the door is green, and you're insisting that it smells like turmeric.
As I don't embrace the relevance of your yardstick, I don't accept the obligation of your question.
Those are your words, not mine.
I'm not missing it at all. I understand perfectly well what you're saying. To draw a parallel, I'm saying that the door is green, and you're insisting that it smells like turmeric.
As I don't embrace the relevance of your yardstick, I don't accept the obligation of your question.
U
Yes it seems to be this way with glossolalia in modern day churches.......... if is not an earthly language (according to science), and not an angelic language (since the text is obviously hyperbole) I do not know how it would be defined, certainly scripture speaks of gift of languages, however glossa is always a reference to language (or the physical tongue), however, what occurs in present day churches does not match that either?
I guess we will leave it there then.
Are you trying to reduce this argument into a philosophical one? It is very easy to rumble on about fallacies but very difficult to prove meaningless words/tongues. And you have no basis for dismissing the 'tongues' spoken by snake handlers. You suggest that they are a different group from you and you also suggest that their tongues are fake and you can not be associated with them and what they do.
This must be the fallacy of all fallacies because the snake handlers practice their tongues from their understanding of 1 Cor 12-14 and Acts just like you do. If the snake is put down for a minute, there's absolutely no difference between you and them.
This must be the fallacy of all fallacies because the snake handlers practice their tongues from their understanding of 1 Cor 12-14 and Acts just like you do. If the snake is put down for a minute, there's absolutely no difference between you and them.
-
1
- Show all
You argue but have no basis, you even loosing track of your own argument. You said all gifts will cease during Christ's millennial rule and i pointed to you, Paul says in 1 Cor 13 that these three shall remain when every gift ceases, Hope/Faith/Love. My question is, do you think during Christ's rule people will still be hoping and having faith unto salvation and praying?
-
1
- Show all
I can appreciate that you aren't a beginner in logic. After all, you did manage to employ two fallacies in one sentence.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
Whether any (or even every) particular "gloss" is found to have the scientific markers of language, while interesting in and of itself, is not proof either way for its genuineness as a manifestation of the spiritual gift. Scripture simply doesn't use modern scientific "approval" as a criteria. People are welcome to do so, if they choose. There's just no point in arguing over the length of the rope when you're not even using the same yardstick.
We can tell from the bible that the word 'tongue' refers to languages:
Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.
The word 'other' implies that whatever they spoke before is also a 'tongue' only that the spirit enabled them to speak in new tongues. If whatever they spoke before was a language which we know it was, then also new utterances must have been languages.
If they originally spoke Greek, then speaking Greek is also speaking in tongues, if Hebrew, Hebrew becomes a tongue and this applies to all the languages on earth.
This is the yard stick, there are no other yard sticks.
-
1
- Show all
I've always wanted to visit Australia! Every "ozzie" I've ever met has has truly been down to earth and no nonsense
Not all "ozzies" tho:
https://www.couriermail.com.au/news...k/news-story/f3802f8767cacca702a8e0aed56c16b7
-
1
- Show all