- Oct 16, 2004
- 10,777
- 928
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Given that angels converse, your theory of "non-lingual angels" is entirely bewildering and oxymoronic. It's valuable to us all as a lesson, however - a warning about the incoherent conclusions insidious among those infected with a Platonic metaphysics.I think it's not a real language, not a known human one or an angelic one (which would be impossible).
Secondly my theory, mentioned very early in this thread, is that only the initial experience of tongues need be Spirit-inspired, in order to grant the Christian confidence in continually re-using the learned syllables as a private prayer language. By relieving him of the burden of sustaining eloquent prayer, he is more likely to pray over a sick person, for example, for hours and hours at a time. An excellent example of non-eloquent prayer: "As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning.".
Your assumption, apparently, is that such syllables-based private edification can't possibly be part of God's strict definition of the gift. But since that assumption cannot be definitively established, it is largely a statement of bias.
Upvote
0