Tongues Perceived as Real Language

  • 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.
royalscot said:
why did god punish human , by the way, they talk, your concept misses the concept of being understood. would you have to communicate with them to be understood. you never answer the part about spoken word , and written words,

without change we would not have a future bible book
Click to expand...

changes to what? are you suggesting a liberal approach to Biblical interpretation? that God did n ot mean what HE says? or are you allegorically changing the bible? Nimrod has nothing to do with Acts 2 you have not answered that. That was your suggestion. I see nothing you have provided in scripture to show my misunderstanding of tongues in the bible?
 
CS1 said:
I do not see anything you have said that changes the Biblical context of the book of acts which both Paul and Peter were possibly already killed. and you cannot bring the past even out of context to event in a different time frame as it is not ment to be
Click to expand...
you want to answer what has been asked.
actually we are to approach the bible as the word of God and human reasoning i.e. carnal minded blocks one from receiving what is the Authorial intent . contextual meaning is asking what did not author say , who did he say it too? and how do i apply it to day . The Speaker is God(your quote)

what did 70 ad imply, if you see no change
 
royalscot said:
why did god punish human , by the way, they talk, your concept misses the concept of being understood. would you have to communicate with them to be understood. you never answer the part about spoken word , and written words,

without change we would not have a future bible book.

for example
how many translation of the bible are in the world today
Click to expand...

that is why we study both the Hebrew and Greek but eliciting of scriptures causes confusion and does nothing but suggest the bible cannot be trusted unless you agree with certain people
 
royalscot said:
you want to answer what has been asked.
actually we are to approach the bible as the word of God and human reasoning i.e. carnal minded blocks one from receiving what is the Authorial intent . contextual meaning is asking what did not author say , who did he say it too? and how do i apply it to day . The Speaker is God(your quote)

what did 70 ad imply, if you see no change
Click to expand...
70 AD you have asked. what does that have to do with the book of Acts? I did answer I stated both Paul and Peter were dead possibly. Luke was the writer of Acts . maybe you could provide more context
 
CS1 said:
that is why we study both the Hebrew and Greek but eliciting of scriptures causes confusion and does nothing but suggest the bible cannot be trusted unless you agree with certain people
Click to expand...

actually we are to approach the bible as the word of God and human reasoning i.e. carnal minded blocks one from receiving what is the Authorial intent . contextual meaning is asking what did not author say , who did he say it too? and how do i apply it to day . The Speaker is God(your quote)

who said the bible cannot be trusted, being out of context is not saying the bible cannot be trusted.

why are we writting in english grammer , and still not speaking in greek or hebrew.

yet do you think history was freezed to sustain human logic or spiritual logic.


 
CS1 said:
70 AD you have asked. what does that have to do with the book of Acts? I did answer I stated both Paul and Peter were dead possibly. Luke was the writer of Acts . maybe you could provide more context
Click to expand...
you tell me.

carnal minded blocks one from receiving what is the Authorial intent . contextual meaning is asking what did not author say , who did he say it too? and how do i apply it to day . The Speaker is God(your quote)
 
when did the bible tell about 70 ad , would you like to answer that about context to the bible \0/
 
royalscot said:
when did the bible tell about 70 ad , would you like to answer that about context to the bible \0/
Click to expand...

are you saying we cannot trust the biblical writings? and the historical data provided , and geographical location and Biblical ACCOUNTS seen in history ? that the Location recorded in the historical narrative of the bible are not true because they were translated into English?

how about were done . because I do not think you are seriously wanting to talk about the topic of the gifts of the Holy Spirit or or the inerrant word of God .
 
CS1 said:
are you saying we cannot trust the biblical writings? and the historical data provided , and geographical location and Biblical ACCOUNTS seen in history ? that the Location recorded in the historical narrative of the bible are not true because they were translated into English?

how about were done . because I do not think you are seriously wanting to talk about the topic of the gifts of the Holy Spirit or or the inerrant word of God .
Click to expand...
or already quoted in post number 45
who said the bible cannot be trusted, being out of context is not saying the bible cannot be trusted.

why are we writting in english grammer , and still not speaking in greek or hebrew.

yet do you think history was freezed to sustain human logic or spiritual logic.



 
why are we writting in english grammer , and not writing in greek or hebrew, yet we still do not speaking in greek or hebrew.

with out movement of the spiritual, we would not be having this written exchange.


and again proves my point that the spiritual is not a freeze to the bible. so greek and hebrew would only date as far as around 100 ad, last written entry to the bible. but to ignore the history aspect would lead to what i said earlier human logic using a quote to try and prove a spiritual point. etc
 
royalscot said:
why are we writting in english grammer , and not writing in greek or hebrew, yet we still do not speaking in greek or hebrew.

with out movement of the spiritual, we would not be having this written exchange.


and again proves my point that the spiritual is not a freeze to the bible. so greek and hebrew would only date as far as around 100 ad, last written entry to the bible. but to ignore the history aspect would lead to what i said earlier human logic using a quote to try and prove a spiritual point. etc
Click to expand...
good because al lof the new testament writings were done by 95 AD :)
 
for example

For God So Loved the World
16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God John 3

is read and speaking the same, if you understand what is wrote or said,
ie would it mean the same thing, if you understand what is being said or wrote about. (food for thought)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back