Speak in Tongues - essential :

[1stcenturylady]

So is it still raining then?

Of course. It won't stop until Jesus comes and we see Him, FACE TO FACE.

 

[Anto9us]

Rain is still a valid phenomenon, yes indeed.

It may not have rained today where you are, but if that causes you to say "Rain has CEASED and PASSED AWAY!"

Then you would be as silly as a Cessationist, or any other variety of anti-Tonguer...

Biblicist, at Baylor in mid-70's, students were gettin' the Ghost LEFT AND RIGHT !!

Wasn't much argument about Tongues, except at that off-campus Coffeehouse -- on campus, it was POURIN' DOWN!

And I didn't hear much about Calvinism, and had not read Arminius yet, all that was little stuff...

The actual Methodist Student Center at Baylor was tiny, and was more SOCIAL ACTIONS-oriented; I didn't go much -- the Baptists I was cool with cuz I had gone all the way under the water at 19 --

and every other week at the PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICH AGAPES; ya heard "so and so received the Baptism!"

 

[1stcenturylady]

Rain is still a valid phenomenon, yes indeed.

It may not have rained today where you are, but if that causes you to say "Rain has CEASED and PASSED AWAY!"

Then you would be as silly as a Cessationist, or any other variety of anti-Tonguer...

Biblicist, at Baylor in mid-70's, students were gettin' the Ghost LEFT AND RIGHT !!

Wasn't much argument about Tongues, except at that off-campus Coffeehouse -- on campus, it was POURIN' DOWN!

And I didn't hear much about Calvinism, and had not read Arminius yet, all that was little stuff...

The actual Methodist Student Center at Baylor was tiny, and was more SOCIAL ACTIONS-oriented; I didn't go much -- the Baptists I was cool with cuz I had gone all the way under the water at 19 --

and every other week at the PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICH AGAPES; ya heard "so and so received the Baptism!"

Yes, choose your friends wisely. Choose believers, not unbelievers. Choose faithful, not faithless.

As Jesus said, "Let the dead, bury the dead."

 

[Anto9us]

Joel 2:25

And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you.

It struck me that the 'years that the locust hath eaten' might be years of scarcity of charismaton... just a thought. Relates to "the word of Yahweh was precious in those days, for there was NO OPEN VISION

In any case, it seems that Peter preached on a passage from Joel which seemed to speak of REAL ARMIES as well as 4 types of 'locusts' (some kosher, some not) -- and he was affirming THIS WAS WHAT JOEL WROTE ABOUT

 

[Biblicist]

I'm trying to find one, what does BDAG stand for. I have a couple lexicons, but does this one act as a concordance too? Lexicons are helpful if you have interlinear texts to go with it.

The jump from Strong's to Lexicons such as the BGAD and Louw-Nida's can be a bit daunting at first but with a bit of experience these two lexicons can radically help to transform how we currently do our studies.

With the BGAD, you will need to avoid referring to the earlier BAGD and the BAGD as they differ quite a lot from the current BGAD edition particularly with how the new edition has incorporated extended definitions and glosses.

But in the short term, you might find the following website to be of interest which is based on the Louw-Nida lexicon Greek New Testament - Louw-Nida lexicon If you enter into the blue rectangle an English word such as cease it will bring up all the entries that the L-N has for this particular English gloss, then go down to seventh line where you will find παύω, click on the word and this will take you to another page which has some further information, though the lexicons it refers to such as Thayer's is a bit old, but still worthwhile.

If you have either a hardcopy or Bible program edition of L-N the following graphic shows the difference between this useful website and the full version:

And the BDAG Lexicon:

The Louw-Nida and the BGAD are the two primary Lexical references for scholarly research, though others are certainly referred to but these two are deemed to be the primary reference lexicons. I do have the previous BAGD in hardback and it can be interesting to compare the two versions.

Helpful guides that explain the strengths and weaknesses of the BGAD;

• Extended Definitions in the Third Edition of Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon
  
• http://ntresources.com/blog/?page_id=2526

There will be those times when the BGAD simply falls flat so the L-N then becomes a very useful companion; of course, you might decided to eventually buy the L-N as against the BGAD and there is no reason that you shouldn't. Mind you, if you choose to go down the pathway of either the BGAD or the Louw-Nida lexicon then the good ol' Strong's Concordance definitions will be a thing of the past - there will be no return!

Most importantly, over time you will get better and better with using either of these tools and the rewards for putting in a bit of time and effort is something that you will never regret.

 

[Biblicist]

Biblicist, at Baylor in mid-70's, students were gettin' the Ghost LEFT AND RIGHT !!

Wasn't much argument about Tongues, except at that off-campus Coffeehouse -- on campus, it was POURIN' DOWN!

And I didn't hear much about Calvinism, and had not read Arminius yet, all that was little stuff...

The actual Methodist Student Center at Baylor was tiny, and was more SOCIAL ACTIONS-oriented; I didn't go much -- the Baptists I was cool with cuz I had gone all the way under the water at 19 --

and every other week at the PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICH AGAPES; ya heard "so and so received the Baptism!"

For those of us who had the opportunity to experience a bit of the Charismatic Renewal of the 70's, even in our youth, we were definitely blessed to experience such an amazing time for the Church and wow . . . to be at Baylor during a time such as this, how I wish their was a green Kermit the Frog emoticon!

 

[1stcenturylady]

The jump from Strong's to Lexicons such as the BGAD and Louw-Nida's can be a bit daunting at first but with a bit of experience these two lexicons can radically help to transform how we currently do our studies.

With the BGAD, you will need to avoid referring to the earlier BAGD and the BAGD as they differ quite a lot from the current BGAD edition particularly with how the new edition has incorporated extended definitions and glosses.

But in the short term, you might find the following website to be of interest which is based on the Louw-Nida lexicon Greek New Testament - Louw-Nida lexicon If you enter into the blue rectangle an English word such as cease it will bring up all the entries that the L-N has for this particular English gloss, then go down to seventh line where you will find παύω, click on the word and this will take you to another page which has some further information, though the lexicons it refers to such as Thayer's is a bit old, but still worthwhile.

If you have either a hardcopy or Bible program edition of L-N the following graphic shows the difference between this useful website and the full version:

View attachment 201621

And the BDAG Lexicon:
View attachment 201622

The Louw-Nida and the BGAD are the two primary Lexical references for scholarly research, though others are certainly referred to but these two are deemed to be the primary reference lexicons. I do have the previous BAGD in hardback and it can be interesting to compare the two versions.

Helpful guides that explain the strengths and weaknesses of the BGAD;

• Extended Definitions in the Third Edition of Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon
  
• http://ntresources.com/blog/?page_id=2526

There will be those times when the BGAD simply falls flat so the L-N then becomes a very useful companion; of course, you might decided to eventually buy the L-N as against the BGAD and there is no reason that you shouldn't. Mind you, if you choose to go down the pathway of either the BGAD or the Louw-Nida lexicon then the good ol' Strong's Concordance definitions will be a thing of the past - there will be no return!

Most importantly, over time you will get better and better with using either of these tools and the rewards for putting in a bit of time and effort is something that you will never regret.

What I would really like to look up is "word." Logos vs. Rhema. When all the translations back and forth from Aramaic to Greek to Latin back to Greek to English, I was wondering if they took liberties based on their lack of experience. I've thought that Word of Wisdom, and Word of Knowledge, should be Rhema, not Logos. After all, we hear Word of Wisdom and Word of Knowledge from God speaking to us.

 

[Anto9us]

Gosh -- now even my fellow tongues-affirmers are asserting that my Nestle-Aland27th and Textus Receptus interlinears have CEASED!! lol

Ya got me scared dungless of new things to obtain -- yet, no one has spoken Koine Greek for centuries -- how can all this be?

Well, I shall do what I can.

 

[Biblicist]

What I would really like to look up is "word." Logos vs. Rhema. When all the translations back and forth from Aramaic to Greek to Latin back to Greek to English, I was wondering if they took liberties based on their lack of experience. I've thought that Word of Wisdom, and Word of Knowledge, should be Rhema, not Logos. After all, we hear Word of Wisdom and Word of Knowledge from God speaking to us.

Okay,
1. Go to the L-N webpage Greek New Testament - Louw-Nida lexicon
2. Then click on ῥῆμα

or . . .

or . . .

or . . .
Right click to 'View Image' or 'Save As':

 

[Biblicist]

Gosh -- now even my fellow tongues-affirmers are asserting that my Nestle-Aland27th and Textus Receptus interlinears have CEASED!! lol

Ya got me scared dungless of new things to obtain -- yet, no one has spoken Koine Greek for centuries -- how can all this be?

Well, I shall do what I can.

What, thou still uses the ol' Nestle 27! Doesn't it hurt just a bit with all these new releases. When I proudly purchased my expensive hardback BAGD it was only a couple of years until they released the incredibly updated and revised BGAD, but at least having the older edition it can be useful to see where the editors have made changes, both for the good and maybe for the not so good.

 

[Anto9us]

"And, yea, I confess that I useth the 27th, it hurts NOW -- that ye bring it up!" lol

The reality is that rent, electricity, internet and food may have to come ahead of these new-fangled tools, but we shall see...

Wow... if that KING JAMES VERSION was good enough for Paul and Silas -- should be good enuff fer me!!

I'm glad ya got both versions, Bib

 

[Biblicist]

"And, yea, I confess that I useth the 27th, it hurts NOW -- that ye bring it up!" lol

The reality is that rent, electricity, internet and food may have to come ahead of these new-fangled tools, but we shall see...

Wow... if that KING JAMES VERSION was good enough for Paul and Silas -- should be good enuff fer me!!

I'm glad ya got both versions, Bib

Yes, the cost of these resources can certainly be a bit over the top at times, though these tools are something that suits my interests and with my intent to release a website on the things of the Spirit hopefully sometime next year, such as with the Pneumatic material contained within Acts, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Timothy etc then it is been a long term outlay that I feel that I can justify.

Thankfully, as I have a part-time administrative role at a major University here in Australia this has given me an opportunity to avail myself of a huge amount of previously cost prohibitive material.

 

[Anto9us]

May your upcoming website restore years that all 4 types of locusts hath eaten away!

 

[Biblicist]

May your upcoming website restore years that all 4 types of locusts hath eaten away!

Thank you . . . that's an interesting way of putting things.

As we all have our interests, where my own has been simmering for years. Even in my youth I used to ponder about the various understandings that were being given of certain Biblical passages, where many local church speakers seemed to be unsure as to what they believed themselves.

So back in 1994 I started to take a fresh look at the construction of 1 Cor 12, 13 & 14 which after awhile made me realise that Paul's theology was certainly systematic and extremely detailed. So, at this point of time I am in the process of collecting as much data as I can which involves travelling through our Christian college and university libraries scanning (legally) the older out of print commentaries/chapters on 1Cor 12, 13 & 14 in particular, this will help to gain a better understanding of the rather glaring lack of knowledge regarding the Holy Spirit that most scholars of early days had.

As for 2017, this has been the best year for me so far regarding obtaining the better contemporary resources; this will help me to check my own views and ponderings against the better scholars of our time and hopefully if I can produce a website that will be easy to peruse through by even a novice Christian then much of this information can be passed on to them as well. If nothing else, from a Christian perspective I feel that if my life's work as a Believer leads up to all this being realised, then I can one day rest in peace.

It's a great, great time to be a Continuist!

 

[Anto9us]

When I proudly purchased my expensive hardback BAGD it was only a couple of years until they released the incredibly updated and revised BGAD

Well, NEWEST is always best, I guess, (hmmmm.)

In reading Origen's DE PRINCIPIIS last night, I was struck by what was his attributing HEBREWS to Paul, which he (so I read elsewhere) later amended to saying "only God knows who wrote HEBREWS"

so comes up another paradox -- were writers CLOSER TO THE TIME when epistles were written at ADVANTAGE or DISADVANTAGE to today's piled higher and deeper textual gurus?

The phrase "actual Pauline epistles" -- in and of itself -- is glibly thrown out as to be self-evident, but is it?

And I came across a defense of Priscilla as author of Hebrews, which dismissed the use of a masculine pronoun as nothing more than like a modern day female author using initials only, or a masculine name, like George Sand...

 

[Anto9us]

The long-awaited third edition of the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament edited by Fredrick William Danker, needs no introduction as it is the standard lexicon for Greek New Testament studies.

A Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (BDAG)

we shall not all sleep, but those of us who do will find more changes when we wake up

 

[Anto9us]

I am seeking work -- may soon be able to afford this BAGHDAD Lexican (hope no Muslim influence)

Of course you realize, my obtaining it could well be TO TELEION - it might truly BRING IN THE KINGDOM if I was able to afford a hunnerd-and-fifty dollar lexicon

Stand by to CEASE !!

 

[swordsman1]

It took me a while to work out what you were apparently on about.
Even though it would be hard to imagine that there were individuals who had been under the teaching of the Apostles and particularly with that of Paul who we would equate as what we know to be cessationists, they certainly would have existed throughout the Empire, either as a result of them missing out an Apostolic teaching or that the leader/s of their home assembly were in opposition to Paul.

As Paul wrote both First and Second Corinthians to not only the city of Corinth but to the Senatorial Province of Achaia which covered most of what we know as southern Greece, it could be possible that there were some poorly taught visitors passing through Corinth from Achaia itself but I would imagine that most such visitors would have passed through Corinth from other parts of the Empire.

Let me remind you of what you said before your subsequent attempts to dodge your way out of your obvious blunder:

What Paul did object to was with how the entire congregation was praising the Father in tongues all at once during their meetings, which served to confuse the unregenerate and cessationist visitors.

Again, how could there be cessationist visitors in Corinth during the apostolic age, when the definition of a cessationist is someone who believes that certain gifts ceased after the apostolic age?

I see that you are up to your old tricks of cutting out selected portions of a lexical entry and further compounding your blunder by incorrectly pasting it onto the forum with the wrong font type. When I saw the BDAG entry I realised right away that you had corrupted the lexical entry (which I have warned you about before) where you turned the entirety of para. (b) into a gloss and not an extended definition - you must stop doing this!!!!!!!!!

I have the feeling that prior to our interactions on this forum that you may never have used a Lexicon before but this is no excuse for being as sloppy as you are with these entries, by now you should know better.

I see you are using your usual ploy of being ultra pedantic in order to try to deflect attention away from your obvious mistakes, this time claiming 1 Cor 12:31 should read 'graces' instead of 'gifts'. Whatever font is used, everyone can see for themselves that BDAG, along with all other lexicons, states that charisma means 'gift' throughout 1 Cor 12, including v31 (just as all bible versions have translated it), especially as I have highlighted the relevant parts in red. As you well know, the only parts I removed were the irrelevant drawn-out sections that BDAG says do not apply to 1 Cor 12 (and in doing so inadvertently removed the italic tag after the gloss).

 

[1stcenturylady]

Joel 2:25

And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you.

It struck me that the 'years that the locust hath eaten' might be years of scarcity of charismaton... just a thought. Relates to "the word of Yahweh was precious in those days, for there was NO OPEN VISION

In any case, it seems that Peter preached on a passage from Joel which seemed to speak of REAL ARMIES as well as 4 types of 'locusts' (some kosher, some not) -- and he was affirming THIS WAS WHAT JOEL WROTE ABOUT

What is the text for Joel talking about non-kosher locusts. I thought all locusts and grasshoppers were clean.

 

[Anto9us]

It's not in Joel, but Leviticus, 1stcenturylady

Lev 11:21
Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;

Lev 11:22
Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.

Lev 11:23
But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.

Lev 11:24
And for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean until the even.

I think a key phrase is "which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth" -- somehow how high up their legs are was seen to be a difference in kosher or not

There are other Talmud references to non-kosher locusts -- I'm just a Wild Olive Branch -- and don't care

Are locusts really Kosher?!