Praying in Tongues
- Thread starter 88
- 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.
Hey, Guy we already knew that and you are not one of the lower casing either.
Don't flip the script because you thought you could out-think those here.
There are many here who do not see tongues as for today who are more of an apostle than you would ever be. You came here with a perverted video of mockery which as I said way back those types of videos are created by an atheist.
like the ones of south park. YOU posted it here. how could someone who claims to be Spirit-filled allow themselves to be used to mock the Holy Spirit as your cartoon you posted did?
I am I to say you have a devil? no, you were in error and clearly ignorant. But that does not mean you are not saved or have an evil spirit as you suggest we do. Now please have a nice day.
Don't flip the script because you thought you could out-think those here.
There are many here who do not see tongues as for today who are more of an apostle than you would ever be. You came here with a perverted video of mockery which as I said way back those types of videos are created by an atheist.
like the ones of south park. YOU posted it here. how could someone who claims to be Spirit-filled allow themselves to be used to mock the Holy Spirit as your cartoon you posted did?
I am I to say you have a devil? no, you were in error and clearly ignorant. But that does not mean you are not saved or have an evil spirit as you suggest we do. Now please have a nice day.
that doesn't work anymore wolfwint
we have been over that with you and others multiple times so quit yer whinin.
you must have a list you go down to offer negative comments and I guess you are back to number one now having exhausted your supply
notice how Baptist person favors the kundalini youtube offering. but if you are at all savvy, you will not use that one!
we have been over that with you and others multiple times so quit yer whinin.
you must have a list you go down to offer negative comments and I guess you are back to number one now having exhausted your supply
notice how Baptist person favors the kundalini youtube offering. but if you are at all savvy, you will not use that one!
The Lord knows at best what is right and wrong.
No, but i can recognize if a another spirit teach than the Holy Spirit.
Its a gift, i did not ask for. I had it from beginning.
A few miscellaneous comments on some of the posts –
Paul says that he is thankful that he speaks languages more than all. As someone whose mission was to spread the gospel, and given that he was, for his time anyway, a ‘world traveler’, it stands to reason that he would have used his knowledge of languages more than the average Joe on the street. I don’t think he’s bragging at all, merrily stating that in his ‘occupation’ (as it were), he uses foreign languages more than anyone he knows. Paul could have gotten just about anywhere in the Mediterranean Basin with just Greek, Latin and Aramaic. He just happened to use them on a daily basis considerably more than others. I don’t see this as an allusion to speaking anything but real, rational language(s).
Mark 16:17 – aside from it being a later addition to the original, the “speak in new tongues” (read speak in new languages) simply means that in order for the message of Christianity to be spread to the world, people were going to need to learn the languages of the people they were preaching to. They would need to learn to speak in "new languages" – new to them, but certainly not to those who already spoke it.
If I say to someone, “Hey, I just started learning a new language last week” – does that mean the language is hitherto unknown or unheard of?? No, of course not. It just means that, for me, it’s a new language.
Yes, I know the old “neos’ / “kainos” thing – kainos has the meaning of ‘new, novel, not previously known’ – and that’s exactly right – new/novel/previously unknown….to me, not to everyone who already speaks the language.
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
I’ve commented on this one quite a bit. It’s one of the quintessential passages to “proof” tongues.
In a slightly more modern English and more a literal translation from the Greek: “For one that speaks in a language, speaks not to men, but to God; no one hears with understanding; howbeit in the spirit he speaks mysteries”
The demographic situation in Corinth at that time must also be taken into consideration as it also plays a role in the understanding of these passages.
Historical context seems to be often left out of many interpretations of Biblical texts. In this case, I think that because historical context is rarely given any consideration, one of the main points of the passage is completely missed; for Paul, this appears to be clarity and understanding at a public worship so that all may benefit. This, in a geographic setting where everyday communication presented obstacles.
To take a sort of analogy –
If I attend a worship service in ‘East Haystack’, Alabama a few things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone in East Haystack speaks anything but English is pretty slim to nil.
If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one there will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at that particular service. In this sense, therefore, I am speaking only to God, since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (see that defined below), to those listening to me, I’m speaking “mysteries”, just an idiomatic way of saying “we have no idea what he’s saying”.
The other issue that goes with this is the Pentecostal/Charismatic redefinition of “praying in the spirit” – it does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
There just isn’t anything in that passage that even remotely suggests the speaker does not understand what he’s saying. It’s just not there, but it’s typically “read into” the narrative to ‘proof’ the modern tongues phenomenon.
Not one of these passages above refers to anything but real, rational langue(s) – perhaps not understood by those hearing it, but always understood by the one speaking it (it’s his/her native language).
Paul says that he is thankful that he speaks languages more than all. As someone whose mission was to spread the gospel, and given that he was, for his time anyway, a ‘world traveler’, it stands to reason that he would have used his knowledge of languages more than the average Joe on the street. I don’t think he’s bragging at all, merrily stating that in his ‘occupation’ (as it were), he uses foreign languages more than anyone he knows. Paul could have gotten just about anywhere in the Mediterranean Basin with just Greek, Latin and Aramaic. He just happened to use them on a daily basis considerably more than others. I don’t see this as an allusion to speaking anything but real, rational language(s).
Mark 16:17 – aside from it being a later addition to the original, the “speak in new tongues” (read speak in new languages) simply means that in order for the message of Christianity to be spread to the world, people were going to need to learn the languages of the people they were preaching to. They would need to learn to speak in "new languages" – new to them, but certainly not to those who already spoke it.
If I say to someone, “Hey, I just started learning a new language last week” – does that mean the language is hitherto unknown or unheard of?? No, of course not. It just means that, for me, it’s a new language.
Yes, I know the old “neos’ / “kainos” thing – kainos has the meaning of ‘new, novel, not previously known’ – and that’s exactly right – new/novel/previously unknown….to me, not to everyone who already speaks the language.
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
I’ve commented on this one quite a bit. It’s one of the quintessential passages to “proof” tongues.
In a slightly more modern English and more a literal translation from the Greek: “For one that speaks in a language, speaks not to men, but to God; no one hears with understanding; howbeit in the spirit he speaks mysteries”
The demographic situation in Corinth at that time must also be taken into consideration as it also plays a role in the understanding of these passages.
Historical context seems to be often left out of many interpretations of Biblical texts. In this case, I think that because historical context is rarely given any consideration, one of the main points of the passage is completely missed; for Paul, this appears to be clarity and understanding at a public worship so that all may benefit. This, in a geographic setting where everyday communication presented obstacles.
To take a sort of analogy –
If I attend a worship service in ‘East Haystack’, Alabama a few things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone in East Haystack speaks anything but English is pretty slim to nil.
If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one there will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at that particular service. In this sense, therefore, I am speaking only to God, since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (see that defined below), to those listening to me, I’m speaking “mysteries”, just an idiomatic way of saying “we have no idea what he’s saying”.
The other issue that goes with this is the Pentecostal/Charismatic redefinition of “praying in the spirit” – it does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
There just isn’t anything in that passage that even remotely suggests the speaker does not understand what he’s saying. It’s just not there, but it’s typically “read into” the narrative to ‘proof’ the modern tongues phenomenon.
Not one of these passages above refers to anything but real, rational langue(s) – perhaps not understood by those hearing it, but always understood by the one speaking it (it’s his/her native language).
1. Cor. 14.39 is no proof for the teaching that everybody who got baptised with the Holy Spirit has received the gift to speak in tongues as sign that he is baptised with the Holy Spirit.
And wether Mark 16 realy means us today ore believers in the apostolic time is not realy solved. When we read about the Apostles in their time, compare with our time today. I would say it was for the apostolic time. Otherwise the witness would be more obvious. While in the apostolic time these all became true.
And Luke 11.13 has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.
And wether Mark 16 realy means us today ore believers in the apostolic time is not realy solved. When we read about the Apostles in their time, compare with our time today. I would say it was for the apostolic time. Otherwise the witness would be more obvious. While in the apostolic time these all became true.
And Luke 11.13 has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.
7
well how else would a non-believer address the subject?
why don't you open up the conversation by telling us what you actually believe?
there just isn't anything in your current spiritual state that would allow you to do anything other than negate tongues
I don't know why anyone here should continue to address your posts as you come here with anything but an honest desire to actually have a conversation
what do YOU believe?
I never said it was. I am saying that when those who received the Holy in the book of ACTS DID SO BY THE WAY THE BOOK OF ACTS tell they did. Just practicing free vacillation as you by saying " that is not Proof" or "CS1 did not show any proof " is not even a valid claim. Can you please show me in scripture what else happens to those who had hands laid on them and they spoke in tongues or prophesied recorded in the Book of Acts? And while you're at it, why did they lay hands on them anyway and when they did, what was it they say to them?