Speaking in tongues

NO sir, i'm not warped but you are. the term Utterance is what is used in the KJV, your issue is with it? you can use utterance anyway you like true however, you cannot change the context of the word as it is used in Acts 2.

the gifts of the Holy Spirit are supernatural they are explained as such in 1cor 12 through 14. The word
glossa = of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):—tongue. acts 2:4 Greek.
yes right we do need to have what is known as authorial intent

that is done by using the circle of Contextual meaning:

1.what was the author saying
2. who was the author saying it to?
3. what was the time frame in which it was said
4. how did they apply it when it was said?
5. how do we apply it today.

we can go back and forth with hermeneutical methods all you would like sir, but you are incorrect in your point of
" you need to put things into historical and cultural perspective to gain a better understanding of what was written."

If you do not follow steps 1 to 5 .

lol hypothesis hahahha dealing with secular humanist trying to understand The Holy Spirit from the limited ability of the human mind.

you use the term to support your humanistic approach to Biblical interpretation

modern tongues-speech is not a Biblical term nor is in the word of God you are using secular humanism to disprove your bias. and You are failing terribly

rational language that caused those in IS 28 to scoff and mock and in Acts 2 to as coff and mock. and have Paul write about in 1cor 14 .

“They began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them utterance” – they began to speak in other languages as the Spirit inspired them to do so, i.e. speak in other languages. The Spirit inspired them to speak, and perhaps even inspired them on specifically what to say, but it didn’t tell them what language to say it in.

The “circle of contextual meaning” sure sounds a lot like putting things into cultural and historical perspective.

we all have 'several gifts', at different times, according to Yeshua's timing -
we, hub and I, never question Him on His daily dispensations...

And yet done correctly it still glorifies God.

Just like the Bible says!

Amazing!

No, one narrows down data sets when one picks and chooses data

the words " Spirit gave " means the ability to do, and then they spoke. yes, the circle of context does do that from the Point of where it is introduced. One verse mention in Isaiah 28 does not change the context of three chapters on the gifts of the Holy Spirit in 1cor 12-14 . And it does not say who was speaking what language but it does say what they all heard in the language the hearers knew.

Lol. I am conducting my own analysis thank you. I will constrain as I wish.

lol conducting your own huh? great I'm sure your finding will produce what you bais creates. Hey will you even use the word of God or is that not needed anymore for you?

he was informing them that they knew not the lord not that they would become more distant than no faith. They mocked God's prophecy . Verses 9-11 is God telling them they refuse to believe prophecy it is offensive to them just as the Jewish disciples that walked away in unbelief in John 6 . They stooped up their ears as a hard saying offensive.

yet they did not listen to the word of the Lord given to Isaiah, did they? Just as they almost did on the day of pentacost. Yet Paul in 1cor 14 is dealing with some of the same things scoffing and mocking verse 21

Click to expand...

No such thing as almost believing. It was God mocking them by bringing the prophecy in other languages .Again it was as sign against them confirming they "will not" hear prophecy. Just as explained in Isaiah 28 the foundation of the doctrine of tongues



There is no new tongues as prophecy today as new revelations we have the whole or perfect. Today if a person wants to bring prophecy that exists in other tongues other than their own . They have electronic programs that can interpret one language from another and many are still brining new translations of people who do not have the written word of prophecy .

Its how prophecy God's word in all the languages of the world work .Translation are found in most languages and the one that are not are a work in the progress.

His language the signified by which we can understand His mysteries. Which language dialect seeing he brings his interpretation, the bible in all languages .French, Hebrew German, Chinese, Swahili ?

Like His word says 'an unknown tongue'. Example, like when I'm praising & thanking God for His mercies, my feelings go beyond words into the Spirit language bc He is so good. I hope that makes sense. Jude 20 '...building UP yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost' so I take it we are speaking to God things we may not understand but in the Spirit He does and building our faith is a necessity to me.

I Corinthians chapter 12.

you do not know the context of 1cor tongues or what you say or think is prophecy. Prophesying is not the same as prophecy. They are different in the Greek and the interpretation from Hebrew word in translated English for "Prophecy" is not the same meaning for Prophesying in Greek found in 1cor 14. They would not hear the Word of LORD Isaiah 28 nor would they hear with other languages. AS Paul is explaining in chapter 14 from verses 19 to 23 the context in IS 28, they did not listen then to the word of the Lord = prophecy and they will not listen to the Prophesying= spoken under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Never the less the word of the Lord will go forth. Is 28 is not the foundational doctrine of Tongues. that is improper biblical interpretation. Mark 16 is foundational because Jesus Christ is the final authority. John 14 to 16 chapters spoken by the Lord are, Acts chapter 1 & 2 are, 1cor chapter 12 to 14 are Not IS 28. The Lord would use one whole chpater with only 3 verses to explain tongues the gift of the Holy Spirt ? I thought you would use Joel chapter 2. what a bunch or allegorizing that is done.

again you don't know what Hebrew Old Testament word "Prophecy" is from New Testament Greek word "Prophesying".

No, Sketch suggested that we thank a Catholic, not "the Pope".

I don't really care what the Catholics claim and I don't care whether the pope fits the description of "daysman". Both are irrelevant to the discussion of tongues.