- Jun 12, 2009
- 5,244
- 1,767
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Charismatic
- Marital Status
- Married
If "I know where they were" obliquely means you really don't agree with me, then you should rebut, and not divert. My POV clearly spells out the two different tongues spoken from one location on that day.I know where they were and for clarity sake, lets drop the word "tongue" since there is such an emotional attachment to it by those who speak in tongues.
I suppose Crazimatics' may certainly come out as 'too emotional' to the fundamental church. But (sad though funny), I've also heard those same 'Crazimatics' call those same fundamentalists things like, 'the frozen chosen' 'bedside Baptists' 'mattress Methodists' etc.etc. for their very lack of emotion. Personally I don't consider myself to be 'that emotional', other than those emotional fruits I strive for which are called LOVE, JOY and PEACE. I hope those emotions don't bother you guys too.
Are you not hearing, or just not understanding what I've said. I agree with what you're saying, in as much as you got right. You want to call it languages because we're emotional...sorry. Just as long as you don't carnal mindedly hyperblole "tongues of men and of angels" into 'languages of men' period. And since the KJV uses "tongues" 20 times in chapter 12-14 and 'your' suggested word "language" is only in the NT once I'm suspicious as to your reason 'why'. Your point seems to come more from 'doctrinal protection' than it does 'seeking the truth' wherever it may lead. As a matter of fact your preferred "languages" is only used one single time in the KJV NT, and that's in Acts 2:6 and is the Greek word dialektos as pertaining to dialect. A bit different than the 20X GLOSSA/TONGUES is used in Corinthians. And whether they be they earthly tongues heavenly tongues or both contextually, is truly the point here. My unemotional opinion is call Glossa what the Greek says it is.Let's use instead, what the underlying word specifically is saying.. LANGUAGES. On that day they spoke in OTHER LANGUAGES and all the people from all the nations there heard them in their OWN LANGUAGE. This isn't an "unknown tongue" because Luke specifically states that they spoke in an "other" language not an "unknown" or "angelic" or "spiritual" or "godly" language.
If one can't "rightly divide the word" to separate the nuanced difference between prayer tongues/languages 'BY US, from our spirit TO GOD', which no man understands, as opposed to tongues manifested THROUGH US from the HOLY SPIRIT then you're stumped. You can't possibly go on to the deeper revelation of the difference between the prayer tongue of your spirit for "self edification" and tongues from the Holy Spirit for 'others edification' as on the day of Pentecost.
Upvote
0