The Proper Meaning and Usage of the "Tongues" of 1Cor14 -- Human Languages Only

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Scope: These forum guidelines apply to all Theology Forums.

1: Scope of Discussions: These forums are for the discussion of Christian Theology, Ethics, and History. For the purposes of the Theology forums, discussion is limited to Christian faith and practice as framed in the Nicene Creed. This includes the study of what Christian churches teach and confess, what Christians believe, and what the Bible teaches.

Discussion of non-Nicene beliefs is limited only to discussion from a Nicene point of view for purposes of evangelism.

2: Provide Citations: When quoting material from another site, you must provide a link to your source material for authentication. If quoting from a hard copy then proper citations must also be used. At a minimum the title of the book, magazine, article etc and the name of the author must be posted.

3: Focus on Topics: Discussions should be about doctrines and history, not about other members or their personal faith. Posters who include egregious personal insults and accusations in their posts have their posts edited by moderator staff, and may be issued notices and/or forum specific bans due to them, depending on the seriousness of the flame.

4: Provide Supporting Statements: Posters in Theology are expected to treat one another with courtesy and respect at all times, ESPECIALLY if you disagree with each other. When you disagree with someone's position, you should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial.

5. Respect Differing Points of Reference: It is expected that people who post in Theology will respect people of faith, including those for whom faith and logic are not contradictions, but complements to one another. To some Christians, arguments from the Bible, from doctrine, and from tradition, are just as valid (and at times more valid) than arguments from logic, reason, science, or history. Whether you are arguing from faith or from logic or some combination thereof, you should respect the other person's point of reference.

6. Accusations of non-Christian doctrine: Stating that another member's church is not Christian is not allowed. However, stating a teaching or belief of another church is not Christian because of X, Y, and Z, is allowed.

7: "Tread Carefully" Topics: Theology posters are expected to understand that accusations of heresy, false doctrine, idolatry, anti-Christ, cult, non-Christian beliefs, antisemitism, etc., are very emotionally laden. They are not conducive to clear discussion. While they are not forbidden in the context of a discussion (with evidence, examples, and/or support), they are discouraged by themselves, as terms of insult. This rule may be referred to as the "tread carefully" rule.

8: Discussion of Historical Figures: Discussion of historical figures important to Christians of many theological backgrounds is a necessary component of theological discourse. Such figures include [but are not limited to]: the Pope, the Patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox Churches, various Church Fathers (e.g., St. Augustine), Martin Luther, John Calvin, Pat Robertson, Billy Graham, etc. Such figures are not immune from criticism. However, insults and accusations against these people are not to be posted lightly, and may only be used when accompanied by citation of sources and in the "If X, then Y, because of Z" format. Statements unaccompanied by these requirements will be deemed inflammatory and dealt with appropriately.

9: Report OR Refute, Not Both: When confronted with a post which a member believes to be a violation of the rules, there are two basic options. The member can respond to the post and try to persuade the other member to correct and/or clarify the perceived slight, or they can report the post. Please refrain from both reporting a post, AND responding to it in the thread. Do one, or the other. If it is indeed a violation of the rules, chances are good that it will be edited or deleted, and any responses will either make no sense or will end up deleted in a thread cleanup. Please do not try to "eat your cake and have it, too."

10: Limit quote size: When copying and pasting quotations from other works, limit the size to 20% of the original article, or other work, while providing proper citation as noted above.

Stipulations:



1. ) Title:

The Proper Meaning and Usage of the "Tongues" of 1Cor14 -- Human Languages Only

2.) Participants;

• Affirmative: zeke37
  

• Negative: James-49

3.)Number of rounds:


Five Rounds; each party makes five alternating posts, that would equal a debate with five rounds.

4) Posts will be made alternating and the affirmative position goes first.

5) Time limit between posts:

One week.

6)Length of posts:

Maximum of 1000 words.

7) Quotes and References are allowed; Please note that all quotes will fall under the 20% rule.

8) Note:

Since James-47 is a relatively new member and does not yet have enough posts to allow him to post links; in the interest of fairness, posting of links will not be allowed in this debate.

9) The start date of the debate:

Any time.

The link to the Peanut Gallery may be found here: Peanut Gallery-Formal Debate-Tongues

 

[zeke37]

Hello. Thank you for setting up this debate mark, and thank you for debating in it with me James.

definition from the Strong's Concordance.
1100
glwssa
glossa
gloce-sah'
of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):--tongue.

for the purposes of this discussion, i think we can agree that tongue(s) refers to languages, whether human or not.

let's discover what was said before the chapter in dispute.
Jesus said...

Mar16:15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

so, we know that the great commission for us Christians is to preach the Gospel to all the world, into all their tongues/languages.

but there will come a time when the Holy Spirit will speak for us, through us, directly...

Mar13:8For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.
9But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.
10And the gospel must first be published among all nations.
11But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.

God gave us the great commission of spreading the Gospel into all nations, and i believe that great commission will end on the very last day, when Christ arrives.
so i believe the above is a future event

but that commission, to the entire world, is kick-started in Acts2 by the Holy Spirit.
there were many Israelites there, from all over...gathered for the festival.
there were many different hebrew dialects represented in the crowd, and even other languages.
languages were localized over a much smaller area back then.
through this one event, the Gospel moves from one language/tongue, into many,
so eventually, with all our help, the Gospel can be in every language/tongue.

Acts2:1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

like Jesus said above....

remember that this was a "visual" miracle.

5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
6Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

the disciples were from Galilae and had a shared dialect.
but the crowd did not hear the disciples home dialect when they spoke.
rather they each heard their very own dialect.

8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
12And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
13Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
14But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:
21And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
22Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

so Peter raises his voice so all can hear him and tells them that this is like what Joel speaks of.
(I think this age will end the same way, cloven tongues of fire)

and then after this, the Holy Spirit continues and preaches the Gospel to them, through Peter's raised voice.
even the guys in the back of the crowd could hear him now.

this message was not received well by everyone, as the crowd learned that the Jews were not the only ones who would be saved by their God.

but it was a supernatural event. with visual aids.

so the disciples travel and preach to who they met.
it is not written that the Holy Spirit tongue miracle of Acts2 was in play from then until Acts 10,
but it is clear that the disciples continued travel and to preach the Gospel abroad.

so evidently, sometimes the gospel was shared by folks just talking to each other, communicating effectively...
sometimes it was a supernatural event

Acts10:42And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

not only the disciples were filled and spoke with tongues(like in Acts2), but now even gentiles were.
from Hebrew and Greek, into the disciples and Jews at Pentacost dialects, and now into all these gentile languages and dialects....

perfect words from the Holy Spirit about the Gospel of Christ, moving through the tongues/languages of the gentiles.

Acts15:7And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.


Acts19:1And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, (John the baptist's disciples)
2He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
7And all the men were about twelve.
8And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
9But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.
10And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.
11And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:

continuing to spread

so we know Apollos was at Corinth
now Paul gets there.

1Cor12:1Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
2Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
3Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
8For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14For the body is not one member, but many.
...
..
.
27Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

i believe this church was in real trouble....
they were gentile, and there were many different languages and dialects in the big city.
imagine the confusion that would cause at the city's only church.
it's pretty hard to understand each other's messages, if you cannot understand the language that the message comes in.

Christianity was new, and the order of operations at this church was evidentally not working.
mass confusion....

Paul explains the differences and ranking order of the Spiritual Gifts.
among them, are diverse kinds/diversities of tongues/languages.

remember that we have two different, repeated examples...
one very supernatural and visual.
the other by way of their own mouths...

now, the Holy Spirit is involved in both, but they are not the same.
the end result is the same however...
the great commission.

 

[James-49]

Thanks to you both for this opportunity. here we go:

According to Merriam-Webster the primary definition of language is:
"a: the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community"

A secondary definition follows:
"b (1): audible, articulate, meaningful sound as produced by the action of the vocal organs (2): a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures, or marks having understood meanings"

The following Scriptures indicate the conveyance of meaning but without human articulation, and not readily understood by a community.
Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (KJV)
2Co 12:3-4 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth
How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (KJV)

I would therefore agree that "glossa" as it pertains to this debate refers to language, but as indicated in the secondary definition, and as you stated "whether human or not".
--------------------------------------------------------
The references you provided of Mark 13:11, Acts 2:4, and your statement "but it was a supernatural event" would indicate we also agree that language, whether articulated or indicated, is at times prompted and conducted by supernatural intervention rather than solely by human volition.
--------------------------------------------------------
Returning now to Mark:
Mar 16:15-18 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (KJV)

"they shall speak with new tongues". Rather than continuing to build directly on "tongues" as the focal point, I'd like to present an examination of "new" in order to better show the context of tongues.

Strong's G2537 defines "new":
kainos
Of uncertain affinity; new (especially in freshness; while G3501 is properly so with respect to age): - new.

Strong's G3501 defines "new":
neos neo¯teros
A primary word, including the comparative (second form); “new”, that is, (of persons) youthful, or (of things) fresh; figuratively regenerate: - new, young.

The first word (G2537 - kainos) is used:
2Co 5:17 So that if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new! (KJV)
Mat 13:52 Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old. (KJV)


The second word (G3501 - neos neo¯teros) is used:
1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: (KJV)
Col 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: (KJV)


G2537 indicates new as in not from before, while G3501 inicates renewed as something from before made better.

I just took 2 examples of each use of the word "new", but throughout the New Testament the use is coherent where:
G2537 - kainos indicates an external impartation not dependent on human volition, and
G3501 - neos neo¯teros indicates an external impartation in conjunction with human volition.

"new tongues" as used in Mark 16:17 is G2537 - kainos, which indicates the external impartation not dependent on human volition.

Now, a supernatural impartation can indeed prompt the speaking in a known language, but Paul writes:
1Co 14:2 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. (KJV)

According to Strong's G3762 "no man" is defined:
oudeis
Including the feminine οὐδεμία oudemia
oo-dem-ee'-ah and the neuter οὐδέν ouden oo-den'
From G3761 and G1520; not even one (man, woman or thing), that is, none, nobody, nothing: - any (man), aught, man, neither any (thing), never (man), no (man), none (+ of these things), not (any, at all, -thing), nought.

Were the language a human language, at least one person would be able to understand it, but Paul says not even one. And here he acknowledges an "unknown tongue".
--------------------------------------------------------
This begs the question to why new tongues instead of improved tongues? Don't get me started - lol

Isa 6:5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. (KJV)
Mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. (KJV)
Luk 6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. (KJV)
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. (KJV)
Rom 3:13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: (KJV)
Jas 3:8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. (KJV)

From these passages it's clear that man of his own volition is not capable of praise to our Creator - or even conversation. But again in Scripture:

Mat 21:16 And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? (KJV)

Strong's G3516 defines "babes":
nēpios
From an obsolete particle νη ne; implying negation and G2031; not speaking, that is, an infant (minor); figuratively a simple minded person, an immature Christian: - babe, child (+ -ish).

The inference is that praise and worship are not limited to verbal, recognized language. A delighted "goo, goo!" appears to qualify.

Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (KJV)

Strong's G215 defines "uttered":
alalētos
From G1 (as a negative particle) and a derivative of G2980; unspeakable: - unutterable, which cannot be uttered.

Here we have groanings (audible) but without human language. This reminds me of times when my heart is bursting, and my desire is for God, and I just can't find the words to convey what's there. That desire to praise.

Praise is the basis of most recorded instances of tongues:
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. (KJV)
Act 10:46a For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. (KJV)

This demonstrates that tongues can praise God, that praise is not limited within human language, and man requires supernatural intercession to practice praise, because:
Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------
Now on to the great commission. We are commanded to carry the Gospel to all nations, but now that begs the question of what is the Gospel? I think we would agree it's the good news of our risen King. We can carry the news of our risen King, but praise is what conveys that news as good news.

I agree that tongues of human language are vital in spreading the good news, but praise is also vital to realizing the good news. The heart that cries, "Jesus Christ is Lord!" whether in English, or Russian, or Canadian; or whether by "Goo goo!" or "Koo Koo for cocoa puffs!" is still a heart in conjunction with God's Spirit giving praise, and fellowshipping with the Father and Son.

It's what prompted Paul to write:
1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. (KJV)

Strong's G3618 defines "edify":
oikodomeō
From the same as G3619; to be a house builder, that is, construct or (figuratively) confirm: - (be in) build (-er, -ing, up), edify, embolden.

The known language, and the interpreted language, is for others but the unknown is for each of us personally. My personal thought is it is extremely intimate and not meant as a carnival or sideshow event.
--------------------------------------------------------

 

[zeke37]

Cor141Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
​

the already written word = prophesy
for a thing to be prophesy to someone the thing must be understood

2For 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.
​

by example
if a greek man speaks the gospel in greek to an englishman who does not understand greek
then he'd be preaching to only God
even tho the greek man is in the Spirit and speaking about God
his words are a mystery to the englishman
instead of edifying the englishman in the Lord, his words would be unintelligible babble
only God would understand the greek man, instead of the englishman

it is a negative not a positive

if that tongue is understood, whether by birth/learned/translater/supernatural,
then those words become prophesy

3But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
​

the positive above

4He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
​

the negative
if the tongue you speak is unknown to the audience, then you'r only speaking to yourself
the positive
if that tongue is understood then your words edify the church

5I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
​

if we all spoke all tongue of man, then that would be great
but we dont so those words interpreted become prophesy
so the audience can be edified

6Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you,
​

that's the negative
if Paul spoke in Hebrew, to those in Rome, what profit is there?

except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
​

that is the positive
the words must be understood to be revelation / knowledge and become doctrine to those in attendance

7And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
​

a negative

8For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
9So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
​

explained much the same way as i explained it above
this a repeated pattern, over and over again

10There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
​

again
if we speak and hear babble, then it will sound like babble
this refers to gentile tongues/languages
speak greek to an englishman and the englishman here's barbarian speech
much the same way when charismatic tongues are spoken, we all hear barbarian speech

12Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
​

by them understanding your words
remember that this is a multi-lingual gentile nation, and their only church
folks gathered there to share scriptures and the gospel and to praise God
it evidently was mass confusion because there was no order
ie. the greek man preaching in greek, to a crowd filled with a multitude of people
all speaking different tongues/languages
people talking over one another etc
confusion

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
​

that he(his greek words) may be interpreted by another in attendance someone who speaks one or more of the crowds tongue/language
having an orderly way to spread the Good News is paramount

14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
​

if I pray out loud, to an audience in my ie. native greek language
and that audience doesn't understand greek
then even tho i am in the Spirit, even speaking the Gospel
the fruit i am trying to produce is unfruitfull to the audience

15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
​

can't be more plain
pray with spirit AND understanding

16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
​

we have to understand the words to have the desired response to them

17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
​

you speaking greek to a culturally diverse audience, might give thanks to God well, but the audience would'nt know it

18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
​

Paul spoke many languages that we know of
He was a Roman citizen, Hebrew, tribe of Ben, house of Judah
God chose him to travel around for the gentiles
and his speaking multiple tongues/languages was a reason

19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
​

even though he speaks many different languages
speaking 1000's of words in greek to an english audience, would accomplish nothing
he'd rather speak 5 words that they'd understand than 1000 that they don't
it is paramount that the audience understand his (our) words

20Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
​

hebrew greek latin english french german, etc

22Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
​

tongues, here, means interpreted tongues
the Good News spreading from one langauge into another that edifies them that believe not
when one understands those words, it's a sign to God for them

23If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
​

the ie. is that there are many different tongues/languages represented under one roof
if there was no order, and people just started to preach in what ever tongue was their own
it would do the others no good, and even confuse those who were new/unlearned/searching
they'll think you're nuts, kinda like many think that charismatic tongues are a little nutty

24But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
25And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

​

if what is preached/sung is understood, then that's prophesy, and the unlearned can learn
everyone can agree, meaning multiple witnesses to the truth of what is said
one must understand the invitation to open themselves to God fully

obviously that is not the case when a person starts to speak in charismatic tongues
because no one understands
someone might claim it, but if it were following the bible here, then everyone would understand

26How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
​

this verse assumes that the speaker and audience speak different languages, and only have one church
and they wish to (are commissioned to) share what they have learned/read

27If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
​

it's ok to speak greek to them,
but make sure your words are interpreted by an interpreter
so the crowd can understand
not too many at one time tho
greek, to english, to french
ok, but stop there, otherwise it would become too confusing

28But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
​

if no one there speaks greek, not even any interpreters
then don't confuse the congregation by giving your testimony in greek
it would mean nothing to them, and sound like babble

29Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
​

as above
two or three at a time
so as not to confuse the audience

30If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
​

if you understand one of the translated languages, or the original, but your brethren beside you does not
don't explain it to him right there and then
wait until your alone, so you continue to hear the entire message
and you won't disrupt anyone else there

32And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
​

God does not author confusion
charismatic tongues bring confusion

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
​

don't explain things in the middle of the service as that would disrupt things

37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
​

the Word of God is not for anyone alone
and certainly not like it is presented with regards to charismatic tongues

39Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40Let all things be done decently and in order.
​

travelling around and spreading the Word is not limited to Hebrew, Greek, or Latin, but rather it is for all tongues

it's ok to spread His message, to others in a foreign tongue
as long as your words are translated for them, into their tongue
now, that may seem a tad obvious but that is what the entire chapter is about
it is not about charismatic tongue, and making it such makes void the word of God that the chapter contains

 

[James-49]

I'm appreciating this format of formal debate. I find myself challenging what I understand, with the realization I must be prepared to change my mind at any point for what is revealed. zeke37, I appreciate your last post. You used a very logical progression of thought that caused me to consider much, but I did discover a faulty premise to your arguments.

Your assertion is that an unknown tongue is one not understood by the hearer.
1Co 14:2 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. (KJV)

Strongs G1100
glo¯ssa
Of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication a language (specifically one naturally unacquired): - tongue.

The tongue as used in this verse, and chapter, indicate a language unknown to both the hearer and the speaker. "naturally unaquired" defines as not learned or gained. The Greek man speaking Greek is not valid as it pertains to the use of the word because he knew Greek prior to his utterance. The Greek man speaking Hebrew, which he never before spoke, would qualify by definition.
---------------------------------------------------------
Your implication follows that tongues are solely for evalgelizing.

1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. (KJV)

There is a gain for the individual who speaks in an unknown language. Now a good that serves more than just one is superior, but as both represent a gain Paul instructed:

1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. (KJV)
---------------------------------------------------------
Language is an evolution and process that serves the individual, as well as the larger group.

A child asks for "busketti", and in their mind they picture the noodles and sauce and meatballs, and they enjoy a sense of comfort in the anticipation.
When understood, the parents provide the spagetti and they all share in the child's delight.

Or the young person declares, "I'm chilling in my crib, chillaxing, with the hip hop and the bling bling", expressing their personal contentment.
When understood, friends visit and share in that contentment.

And what makes the parents, or friends, seek to understand the meaning?

1Co 14:1a Follow after charity (KJV)

Otherwise the parents might tell the child to be quiet, or the friends will declare the individual is nuts, and the comfort or contentment they enjoyed becomes disillusionment.

The man who hits his thumb with a hammer and grimaces, cradles his hand, and cries out, "Yarr ragga dig do yigga!!" is no different than the brother whose heart is swelling with a realization of God's goodness and declares, "yamma namma si da didid!". They are both conveying a deep felt meaning.

1Co 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. (KJV)

Love seeks to understand that meaning, if not the words.

1Co 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. (KJV)
1Co 14:1a Follow after charity (KJV)

Paul welcomed the gifts of God, but his greater delight was the pursuit of love:

1Co 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
(remember the definition is of languages not previously known)
1Co 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (KJV)

There's no doubt that lying signs and wonders are evident in our world. Purposed only to serve greed and envy. But Paul further encourages:

1Co 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. (KJV)

He didn't provide a measuring rule for us to tell the difference, because even the demons declared Jesus as the Holy One of God. What Paul encouraged was that we don't need to fear it. If the unknown utterance is from a heart towards God, then it's not dangerous to us because it is fellowship with God. And if it's from a heart of avarice then again we don't fear because they don't have the Spirit of God, while our trust keeps us in Christ.

I think Gamaliel provided good advice that can be applied here:

Act 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
Act 5:39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. (KJV)

 

[zeke37]

I'm appreciating this format of formal debate. I find myself challenging what I understand, with the realization I must be prepared to change my mind at any point for what is revealed. zeke37, I appreciate your last post. You used a very logical progression of thought that caused me to consider much, but I did discover a faulty premise to your arguments.

Your assertion is that an unknown tongue is one not understood by the hearer.

Hi James....
actually, depends on the context.
it is either known or unknown to the audience that is being preached to.

1Co 14:2 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. (KJV)

Strongs G1100
glo¯ssa
Of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication a language (specifically one naturally unacquired): - tongue.

The tongue as used in this verse, and chapter, indicate a language unknown to both the hearer and the speaker.

i disagree.
the word unknown was added by the translaters of the KJV, and is not in the manuscripts.
the context shows that the tongue in this verse is foreign to the audience,
but obvoiusly not the speaker, as the rest of the chapter attests to.

"naturally unaquired" defines as not learned or gained.

it defines as unknown.
naturally aquired would be us speaking english naturally, since we understand it naturally.
naturaly unaquired would be us not naturally understanding Hebrew, thus not understanding it.

the context of the chapter repeatedly shows that the speaker does know what he is speaking,
and the audience hypothetically does/might not.
since paul does speak many languages/tongues, the audience here understood all his words in this chapter.

but he teaches them how to circumnavigate the language barrier, by way of interpreters and order.

The Greek man speaking Greek is not valid as it pertains to the use of the word because he knew Greek prior to his utterance. The Greek man speaking Hebrew, which he never before spoke, would qualify by definition.

not really.
the context of the chapter shows the speaker knows his own naturally aquired langauge/tongue.

Your implication follows that tongues are solely for evalgelizing.

no. tongues means languages...
we can use languages for what ever we want to...
from blaspheme to evangelism and worship.
but in this chapter, in this context, yes.

1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. (KJV)

There is a gain for the individual who speaks in an unknown language. Now a good that serves more than just one is superior, but as both represent a gain Paul instructed:

you have misunderstood the verse.
first the negative, then the positive.

the negative is, you'd be ONLY edifying yourself instead of the audience,
if you are the only one that understands your tongue.

the positive is, when your words are understood, they can become prophesy to those that listen.

this teaching is repeated multiple times in the chapter.

1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. (KJV)

this is Paul teaching that the gospel is allowed to be spread into all languages of men.

Language is an evolution and process that serves the individual, as well as the larger group.

agreed.

this chapter is all about order, and how to share the Word with others,
in a multi lingual world.

A child asks for "busketti", and in their mind they picture the noodles and sauce and meatballs, and they enjoy a sense of comfort in the anticipation.
When understood, the parents provide the spagetti and they all share in the child's delight.

Or the young person declares, "I'm chilling in my crib, chillaxing, with the hip hop and the bling bling", expressing their personal contentment.
When understood, friends visit and share in that contentment.

And what makes the parents, or friends, seek to understand the meaning?

1Co 14:1a Follow after charity (KJV)

Otherwise the parents might tell the child to be quiet, or the friends will declare the individual is nuts, and the comfort or contentment they enjoyed becomes disillusionment.

The man who hits his thumb with a hammer and grimaces, cradles his hand, and cries out, "Yarr ragga dig do yigga!!" is no different than the brother whose heart is swelling with a realization of God's goodness and declares, "yamma namma si da didid!". They are both conveying a deep felt meaning.

here is where i am drawn...
i guess what ever rocks your boat is fine...who am i to say....but...

1. the chapter does not cover that kind of worship/prayer at all.
2. if folks think it does, then the chapter's true meaningis lost to them.
3. if one think that you can mumble unintelligible utterances, without thinking about specific thoughts,
and have that utterance changed by the Holy Spirit into perfect prayer that the Lord can understand,
then this chapter does not validate that practice and imo outright teaches against such things.

1Co 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. (KJV)

Love seeks to understand that meaning, if not the words.
but the chapter goes on to teach, if you con't recognize the sound, how can you recognize the instrument.

if you can't understand the language,
then how can you understand the message it is given in.
that is the repeated teaching of the chapter.

1Co 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. (KJV)
1Co 14:1a Follow after charity (KJV)

Paul welcomed the gifts of God, but his greater delight was the pursuit of love:

I would rather us go through the chapter, in order, instead of a line or two taken out of context.

1Co 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
(remember the definition is of languages not previously known)

no, Paul spoke many langauges.
this "tongues" is in relation to the audience.
Paul spoke multiple tongues that they all did not.

1Co 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (KJV)


There's no doubt that lying signs and wonders are evident in our world. Purposed only to serve greed and envy. But Paul further encourages:

but you are still relating this to a prayer language. it is not.
Paul is teaching that 5 words understood by the audience are worth more than 10000 words that they cannot understand.

1Co 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. (KJV)

and those are obviously words that we can all understand,
if we understand the language/tongue that they are spoken from.

He didn't provide a measuring rule for us to tell the difference, because even the demons declared Jesus as the Holy One of God.

sorry, you lost me. difference in what? lying signs and wonders?

What Paul encouraged was that we don't need to fear it. If the unknown utterance is from a heart towards God, then it's not dangerous to us because it is fellowship with God. And if it's from a heart of avarice then again we don't fear because they don't have the Spirit of God, while our trust keeps us in Christ.

Paul does not encourage that at all.
he does not mention it even once.

I think Gamaliel provided good advice that can be applied here:

Act 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
Act 5:39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. (KJV)

personally, i think it is a big trick of you know who
taking what would be prayer time, and turning it into this unintelligent - no thought, side show.

when asked, Jesus taught us how to pray,
and it was with words that were understandible.
not with unintelligent or ecstatic charismatic utterances

God is not the author of confusion.

9So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

both. paul says that we are to pray in the Spirit,
but we are to do so in a way that others can understand what you are praying.
this chapter's context is not private prayer, but public exchange in a multi lingual world.

and we have to do so in a way that the ones listening can understand, so they can grow in or come to God.

16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

we have to understand the words to have the desired response to them

17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.


or else it is in vain.

21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.


23If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

again, this is other languages of men, not charismatic tongues.
imagine the confusion that a dozen people all speaking a different language at the same time would bring,
especially without any interpreters

24But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:

25And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

26How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

so if different languages are represented, then make sure everyone in the audience can understand
by way of Christian interpreters.


the chapter just is not about charismatic prayer tongues at all.

 

[James-49]

"naturally unaquired" is from Strong's Concordance. I defined it as "not learned or gained" after consulting Merriam-Webster. What was your reference to say it defines as "unknown" instead?

According to Merriam-Webster:
NATURALLY: by nature : by natural character or ability; according to the usual course of things

UNAQUIRED: not acquired; esp: innate

INNATE: existing in, belonging to, or determined by factors present in an individual from birth; belonging to the essential nature of something

AQUIRED
1: to get as one's own: to come into possession or control of; to come to have as a new or added characteristic, trait, or ability

So I again say "naturally unaquired" defines as not learned or gained.
- naturally aquired would be my learning to speak and understand any language which I never spoke before.
- naturaly unaquired would be my core ability to communicate meaning - because I was not born speaking any language ... even my primary language of English had to be learned, or gained.

There are debates on the origins of language in human beings, but what is common among all views is that a child communicates. The first cry of a newborn is expressed meaning.

The "tongues" refer to our innate capacity to express meaning.

In my first post I supplied the definition of language which includes any method for conveying a meaning.

-------------------------------------------------

the context of the chapter repeatedly shows that the speaker does know what he is speaking,

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (KJV)
1Co 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (KJV)

Paul clearly indicates that the unknown tongue can be without the understanding of the speaker.

-------------------------------------------------

I would rather us go through the chapter, in order, instead of a line or two taken out of context.

All authors of the New Testament refer to Scripture of the Old Testament from various sources in order to convey the greater meaning behind the verses they select. I would submit that selected verses in the chapter can be considered as much out of context as the chapter itself is also out of context when examined outside of the entire letter. My use of scripture, and my purpose in this debate is to examine and try to understand, and hopefully convey the greater meaning behind the chapter and letter.

imagine the confusion that a dozen people all speaking a different language at the same time would bring,

You have described the events of Acts chapter 2. Clearly authored by God, but:
1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. (KJV)

So an episode of "confusion" can be a part of a greater authoring by God for something that is not confusion.

Consider the following analogy:
There is a group of 100 persons, and all speak English fluently. In such a collective, interpretation is automatic because they all speak English.
So one stands up and says, "Picture a dog." And they all do. Then that same one declares, "We will build a good thing for a dog." And they all agree.

But the collaboration eventually degrades into disagreement, separations, factions. A few different items for dogs are produced by separated groups, while the rest can no longer be bothered. Why?

Because not everyone pictured a German Shepard, and not everyone pictured a St. Bernard, and not everyone pictured a Chihuahua. And not everyone pictured a running dog, or a sleeping dog, or a dog that's standing alert.

So when they began to produce their good thing for a dog it became apparent that a good thing for a sleeping Chihuahua was not neccessarily considered the good thing for a running German Shepard. And as they could not come to agreement they split off into the "Sleeping Chihuahua" group, the "Running German Shepard" group, the "Standing St. Bernard" groups, and so on ...

Despite a common word, they split off because no one sought to understand the intended meaning. It wasn't asked, "What kind of dog should we picture?", or "What kind of dog should we build a good thing for?"
They all considered themselves to have grasped the meaning, and it became a matter of principal to protect their interpretations. The "Running German Shepard" group tolerated, but looked down on the efforts of the "standing St. Bernard". And the "standing St. Bernard" group spoke openly against the efforts of the "Sleeping Chihuahua" group.

And when most or all are willing to consider themselves to have grasped the meaning without seeking, then supernatural intervention would only feed their arrogance.

Humility would recognize it was only guessing at the meaning and might be incorrect, would recognize it serves the common effort to understand, and would seek to understand for the benefit of themselves and the other 99. And any supernatural intervention would then feed their development and growth.

1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
1Co 1:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence. (KJV)

So if the "Standing St. Bernard" group has some considered-goofy practices for building their good thing, isn't it possible then that their practices which are helping them in their pursuit, are also helping the other groups that would despise them for their practices by drawing their arrogance to the surface where it can be seen?

And if a particular group of Christians believe that utterances in non-human languages offer God perfect praise and worship because they recognize their own words are imperfect, isn't it possible God allows their practice to draw to the surface the judgements and arrogance of those that think they already understand His ways?

1Co 12:18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
1Co 12:19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
1Co 12:20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
1Co 12:21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
1Co 12:22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
1Co 12:23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
1Co 12:24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
1Co 12:25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. (KJV)

The "Running German Shepard" cannot say they have no need of the "Standing St. Bernard". And moreso, the "Standing St. Bernard" can find itself with greater supernatural intervention than the "Running German Shepard" who might appear to have the greater preference among the groups.

-------------------------------------------------

3. if one think that you can mumble unintelligible utterances, without thinking about specific thoughts, and have that utterance changed by the Holy Spirit into perfect prayer that the Lord can understand, then this chapter does not validate that practice and imo outright teaches against such things.

First, not once did I infer it was without thinking specific thoughts - all conveyed meaning comes from a thought or thoughts. And yes, the Spirit can make the utterance perfect prayer:
Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (KJV)

Those groanings do not replace our words, known language or unknown - they enhance and purify the meaning behind the utterances. The chapter could not teach against that because Scripture doesn't oppose itself.

-------------------------------------------------
Please take a few days in reviewing what I have posted, instead of a few hours. We have a week. I don't think either of us can conclusively prove the tongue was limited to human language, or that it was more than that, without actually having been there, though I think I've demonstrated a substantial possibility that it could be more than just known human dialects. But I do think there's more to the letter than just the visible practice, and I think that search deserves attention more than reaction.

For me, I'm already receiving challenges to beliefs I've held against the idea of separate Christian denominations, and insights towards a greater good than I had previously considered.

 

[zeke37]

Hi Bro....
this is the way i see it.
tongue means languages.
either your langauge is that of your parent's language,
or a language you learned later,
or in extremely rare instances, a langauge that was supernaturally given to you by God to express the Gospel.

the "unknown" word in 1Cor14:2 was an english addition and is not even in the manuscripts.
the translaters thought it obvious that Paul was telling them about a language that was unknown to the audience,
so they added the word unknown.

many argue over the context.

since Paul is speaking, it is obviously known to him,
but Paul teaches by hypothetical example...

Paul is teaching them that;
if you are going to church to preach Jesus,
but your tongue is unknown to the audience,
then don't preach/pray/sing to them about Jesus,
because it would be in vain.

unless you have your words translated
so that your words about Jesus are understood
and they become prophesy to those listening.


this is the entire chapter's premise,
how to spread the Word of God through out the different langauges, in an orderly fashion.

the chapter is never even once about a special prayer language.
not even one time.

however, though the proper division of the chapter,
we can learn that the charismatic tongue as seen today
goes against just about every principle in the chapter.

There are debates on the origins of language in human beings, but what is common among all views is that a child communicates. The first cry of a newborn is expressed meaning.

The "tongues" refer to our innate capacity to express meaning.

In my first post I supplied the definition of language which includes any method for conveying a meaning.

and what is the meaning of a charismatic tongues prayer...
the folks that i have conversed with over the years all have the same thing in common.
they say that they do not premeditate(think about) what they are praying...
but just utter charismatically....trusting God to change their utterings into perfect prayer.

that is completely beyond reason to me, but that is not the point of this thread.
the point is that many assume the chapter to be speaking of charismatic tongues, when it is not,
and believing it is, takes away the truth of the chapter.

the gifts of God exist to further His plan....not for self gratification.
how do charismatic tongues fit into the gifts as they pertain to the Body?
as far as i can see charismatic tongues do not follow suit as the other gifts all do.

and a huge part of that is getting the Word into all languages.
this chapter details how we should go about doing it in multi-lingual assemblies.

it is simply not about a special Spirit led prayer langauge

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (KJV)

paul might be in the spirit, but if he prays (to them) in a tongue that is unknown (to them),
then even though he is in the spirit, trying to preach Jesus,
the understanding that paul has in his mind, will not be understood by them listening,
because they cannot understand his words.
it is a very bad thing....but most charismatics see this verse as a good thing.

1Co 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (KJV)

Paul clearly indicates that the unknown tongue can be without the understanding of the speaker.

no, respectfully, he does not.
he clearly tells them that he would rather speak 5 words that they would understand,
instead of 10000 words in a langauge/tongue that they cannot understand.

that makes perfect sense.

why would Paul say this if tongues (at leat up to this point in the chapter)was a charismatic gift of God?

is Paul saying that 5 words of his own are better than 10000 words of the Holy Spirit led special prayer language?

no...

you are simply misunderstanding what tongues means.
but luckily the entire chapter stays right on point and never waivers.
and it is never even one time about a charismatic prayer language.

my second post details the whole chapter in the proper light.

All authors of the New Testament refer to Scripture of the Old Testament from various sources in order to convey the greater meaning behind the verses they select. I would submit that selected verses in the chapter can be considered as much out of context as the chapter itself is also out of context when examined outside of the entire letter. My use of scripture, and my purpose in this debate is to examine and try to understand, and hopefully convey the greater meaning behind the chapter and letter.

what you did was take a line here, and a line there,
that when read alone, might seem to support your case.

but when read in context of the surrounding verses,
it becomes apparent that they do not support your case.

You have described the events of Acts chapter 2. Clearly authored by God, but:
1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. (KJV)

So an episode of "confusion" can be a part of a greater authoring by God for something that is not confusion.

i'm sorry but
I described what Paul described, basically word for word.
infact, i did word for word in my second post.
Paul is describing what is happening in "their" church specifically,
and it was because of the way it was being improperly conducted,
that we have this book and chapter to learn from.
we learn from their mistakes...

in Acts2, the disciples spoke, and the audience individually heard it in their own native tongues.
here, paul is describing folks coming to church and behaving badly,
by shouting over each other, by many speaking at once,
and by speaking in languages that only confuse others in attendance.

so, paul teaches a hypothetical to them....over and over and over and over again.

in paul's hypothetical story, even though the potential preachers were in the Spirit
(they believe and were trying to spread His Word),
if they speak greek to a chinese audience, the audience won't get it.
it doesn't matter that it is about Jesus.
if no one can understand your message, what good is it?
if that was the case, then you'd only be preaching to God/to the wind/in vain/no one would understand you.

imagine that ten people from ten different countries come together,
all speaking at the same time....
and no one understands each other...

mass confusion....and God does not author confusion

that is what Paul was describing through out the chapter.


assuming you don't speak fluent greek,
try going to an orthadox church and see if you can get anything from the sermon and songs and prayers.

it's all about effective communication.
that is what paul was saying.

And when most or all are willing to consider themselves to have grasped the meaning without seeking, then supernatural intervention would only feed their arrogance.

Humility would recognize it was only guessing at the meaning and might be incorrect, would recognize it serves the common effort to understand, and would seek to understand for the benefit of themselves and the other 99. And any supernatural intervention would then feed their development and growth.

and i spent time in pentacostal church.
i understand the phenomina, but i disagree with it being of God.
but again, that is not even the point of the thread.
the point is whether or not 1Cor14 addresses that charismatic prayer specifically at all,
and i contend that it does not.

And if a particular group of Christians believe that utterances in non-human languages offer God perfect praise and worship because they recognize their own words are imperfect, isn't it possible God allows their practice to draw to the surface the judgements and arrogance of those that think they already understand His ways?

my opinion is no.
but this is not about poinion...

Jesus taught us how to pray, and it was with words.
all the biblical example of prayer is done with intelligent words.
we might not always know what to pray, but we pray His will be done.

i contend that if you utter unintelligible charismatic un-words because you don't have the words,
then that is what God hears as the final product.
you have admitted that you do not think about what you utter because you don't have the words.

i cannot agree wholy with your anaolgy about the dogs,
and based on the fact that it does not have a bearing on our chapter, i won't get into it.

First, not once did I infer it was without thinking specific thoughts - all conveyed meaning comes from a thought or thoughts. And yes, the Spirit can make the utterance perfect prayer:

Yes, I realize that you specifically did not say that previously,
but as i suspected, much like most all your charismatic brethren that i have conversed with
it is what you believe, as your words above showed.

Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (KJV)

a favorite verse of charismatic tongues advocates
what you fail to realize is
it is the Holy Spirit that groans intercession with that which cannot be uttered.

that proves that your practice is not the Holy Spirit,
because, as we just read, the Holy Spirit cannot not utter His intercession...
HIS groanings (to the Father) are un-utterable by man.

you are reading this thinking it is YOU that is uttering,
but the verse teaches that the Spirit makes intercession with groanings that are NOT UTTERED.

Those groanings do not replace our words, known language or unknown - they enhance and purify the meaning behind the utterances.

see what i mean?

The chapter could not teach against that because Scripture doesn't oppose itself.

i really believe your practice is not scriptural at all Bro, hence my objection.
but since scripture does not contradict itself, then your practice must be faulty,
as the chapter repeatedly teaches guidance against what your practice does, routinely.

Please take a few days in reviewing what I have posted, instead of a few hours. We have a week.

i'm up...
i read your response and i replied.
i am a daily user here, so i am always looking for someone to converse with...
sorry i couldn't wait a week.
but u can if ya wanna.

I don't think either of us can conclusively prove the tongue was limited to human language, or that it was more than that, without actually having been there, though I think I've demonstrated a substantial possibility that it could be more than just known human dialects.

i disagree.
i don't believe there is any basis to say that tongues refers to charismatic prayer,
and certainly nothing in the chapter suggests it.

But I do think there's more to the letter than just the visible practice, and I think that search deserves attention more than reaction.

For me, I'm already receiving challenges to beliefs I've held against the idea of separate Christian denominations, and insights towards a greater good than I had previously considered.

to God goes the Glory!

 

[James-49]

this is the way i see it.

to God goes the Glory!

Arrogance and humility can't walk together. I've researched the dictionary, Strong's Concordance, and as many references as I could find in order to support my arguements. I'm prepared to be mistaken, but all you're presenting to me is opinion and assumption.

-----------------------------------------------------------

i really believe your practice is not scriptural at all Bro, hence my objection.
but since scripture does not contradict itself, then your practice must be faulty, as the chapter repeatedly teaches guidance against what your practice does, routinely.

This debate is not about charismatic practices as they are conducted today, or over the last century. I'm seeing you have a strong aversion to those practices, and that aversion is what won't be persuaded. I understand that, but it's rendering this debate as useless.

-----------------------------------------------------------

i cannot agree wholy with your anaolgy about the dogs, and based on the fact that it does not have a bearing on our chapter, i won't get into it.

1Co 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1Co 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? (KJV)

1Co 8:8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
1Co 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. (KJV)

1Co 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
1Co 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1Co 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
1Co 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. (KJV)

1Co 10:30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God (KJV)

1Co 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Co 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 1Co 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. (KJV)

1Co 12:14 For the body is not one member, but many.
1Co 12:15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
1Co 12:16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
1Co 12:17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
1Co 12:18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
1Co 12:19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
1Co 12:20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
1Co 12:21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
1Co 12:22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
1Co 12:23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
1Co 12:24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
1Co 12:25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. (KJV)

It has a lot of bearing on the chapter. You choose not to consider it.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Yes, I realize that you specifically did not say that previously, but as i suspected, much like most all your charismatic brethren that i have conversed with it is what you believe, as your words above showed.

When did I ever say I was "charasmatic"? I am not. You've only assumed I am.

-----------------------------------------------------------

and i spent time in pentacostal church.
i understand the phenomina, but i disagree with it being of God.

I have experienced many denominational practices, which includes pentacostal and charismatic. Whether it's of God or not, only God knows. Is passing the collection plate during services, instead of just having a donations box, of God? Or is it just "good business" to garner funds? Only God knows.

And only God can tell one from another, where similar practices stem from different heart motivations. Ten churches can pass the plate, and not all are of God.

I personally don't practice group, charismatic utterances because I don't agree with it. I don't agree with the "altar call" to get healed. And I don't agree that a person must speak in "tongues" to evidence they received the Spirit of God. But I also don't agree with praying to or through anyone but Jesus Christ. And I don't agree water baptism by ritual and authorized individuals is the one that works. And I don't agree that healings and miracles ended with the early church.

I don't agree, because those things do not come from my heart. But to oppose them (and I have before) is not my place because I cannot tell if they come from the heart of the persons who practice them themselves.

I do agree that God can perform miracles and I have witnessed a couple that He allowed me to be part of. One in a coffee shop, and one in a friend's home, and both evidenced by medical diagnosis. And I agree that I can pray in private with incomprehensible words that honour God because I have received tangible answers specific to the hopes I held at prayer.

I agree because they come from my heart, but recognize they might not come from everyone's heart and can be found offensive to them.

Rom 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
Rom 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
Rom 14:15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
Rom 14:16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of: (KJV)

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. (KJV)

It's not my place to force others to live by my standards (but I have before). If a new dress makes my wife look fat in my opinion, yet she's glowing because she feels terrific, why would I tell her my opinion? Why would I devastate her confidence and self-confidence because I only saw the appearance I perceived, and did not see the beauty she exuded?
I could only do that if I loved my own opinion more than I loved her.

-----------------------------------------------------------

i don't believe there is any basis to say that tongues refers to charismatic prayer,

There's not enough historical evidence that I could find to get a clear picture of the early Corinthian church, other than multi-cultural and pagan practices which may or may not have included unintelligible utterances.

Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. (KJV)

Paul didn't oppose the practice, but used it to point to Christ.

1Co 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1Co 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
1Co 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
1Co 9:23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. (KJV)

Do you put up a tree at Christmas? Do you do so in December? Do you buy chocolate eggs and bunnies at easter? Do you abstain from work on Sunday? Or Saturday? What do you practice in your walk with Christ that has pagan roots?

Prove to me with facts, not opinions, that the chapter is conclusivley not about charismatic utterances. But if you want to debate corporate, chararismatic tongues as a practice then propose a new debate and maybe someone will take you up on it.

 

[zeke37]

Arrogance and humility can't walk together. I've researched the dictionary, Strong's Concordance, and as many references as I could find in order to support my arguements. I'm prepared to be mistaken, but all you're presenting to me is opinion and assumption.

hi James.
i'm sorry u feel that way.
i too verify my understanding by using the Strong's Concordance etc.
i guess i am trying to show that the chapter does not change from what it is teaching
and it is not about charismatic prayer, for lack of a better word.

This debate is not about charismatic practices as they are conducted today, or over the last century. I'm seeing you have a strong aversion to those practices, and that aversion is what won't be persuaded. I understand that, but it's rendering this debate as useless.

this debate, at least for me, is more about how believing that this chapter is about the charismatic prayer practice
makes void the truth of the Word of God in this chapter.

It has a lot of bearing on the chapter. You choose not to consider it.

on the contrary. I completely consider all the scripture you gave. thank you.
it still doesn't make chapter 14 about a charismatic prayer language.
And remember that Paul already had the truth.
he could be one way or another for Christ's sake, because he had a solid foundation.
it certainly doesn't mean that he agreed with everything that folks were doing,
claiming so in Christ's name.

in fact, here in 1Cor14, he was correcting them...not going along with them.

so, while i am certainly not trying to take something away from you that you consider Holy, if it is on a solid foundation.
i am trying to show you, and anyone else that reads along,
that 1Cor14 is not about a charismatic special private prayer language/ecstatic utterances
or whatever one wants to call it
and if you think it is, then you are missing the truth in the chapter.

but while i give my opinion on 1Cor14 being about spreading the Word of Jesus into all languages of men,
my opinion about charismatic tongues itself will undoubtedly be made manifest.

When did I ever say I was "charasmatic"? I am not. You've only assumed I am.

if you pray in tongues/ecstatic utterances/charismatic prayer
as seen in todays charismatic circles(and elsewhere), you are IMO.

that doesn't mean that you have to go to a charismatic church to do so btw.

if you are not, my appologies, but i specifically wanted to debate someone with that understanding, that practices such.
i was generalizing when i said charismatic...
but i think you are, by my definition...because you said earlier...

Those groanings do not replace our words, known language or unknown - they enhance and purify the meaning behind the utterances. The chapter could not teach against that because Scripture doesn't oppose itself.
​

now, i still consider you to be charismatic if you do so in private only

I have experienced many denominational practices, which includes pentacostal and charismatic. Whether it's of God or not, only God knows. Is passing the collection plate during services, instead of just having a donations box, of God? Or is it just "good business" to garner funds? Only God knows.

ok, i agree with the example.

And only God can tell one from another, where similar practices stem from different heart motivations. Ten churches can pass the plate, and not all are of God.

well, that's the thing..there is no special prayer language, charismatic or not, described in 1Cor14
as long as the audience understands your words, it's a good thing.
if they don't, it's a bad thing.

I personally don't practice group, charismatic utterances because I don't agree with it. I don't agree with the "altar call" to get healed. And I don't agree that a person must speak in "tongues" to evidence they received the Spirit of God. But I also don't agree with praying to or through anyone but Jesus Christ. And I don't agree water baptism by ritual and authorized individuals is the one that works. And I don't agree that healings and miracles ended with the early church.

hey, i like what you don't agree with.
but what i don't agree with you about, is that the chapter even implies/mentions it at all.

I don't agree, because those things do not come from my heart. But to oppose them (and I have before) is not my place because I cannot tell if they come from the heart of the persons who practice them themselves.

and that is why i would not judge someone that does it.
i know where their heart is.
it's the brain (or mouth in this case) that i am interested in.

so, do i understand you as someone that practices this kind of prayer, privately at home but not publically?

I do agree that God can perform miracles and I have witnessed a couple that He allowed me to be part of. One in a coffee shop, and one in a friend's home, and both evidenced by medical diagnosis. And I agree that I can pray in private with incomprehensible words that honour God because I have received tangible answers specific to the hopes I held at prayer.

as i have previously stated, if privately you "think about" what you are uttering,
whether i understand it or not doesn't matter as long as God does,
i don't see a problem with it specifically...just kinda silly imo.

it's when folks of similar practice say that they do not think of what they are saying before hand,
and that the unknowable utterances just kinda flow from the heart so to speak.
they don't know what to pray but the Spirit does, they say.

i call shinanigans on that one...
and especialy on the ministers that provide a so called explaination of the unknowable words,
as if it is prophesy.

I agree because they come from my heart, but recognize they might not come from everyone's heart and can be found offensive to them.

but this is not about a simple matter of what goes into the mouth, but rather what comes out.

and we are to test all things, and prove all things.
use scrpiture for correction.
so, iow, not everything is acceptible, even if it is Holy to you personally.

and if your practice replaces what is acceptible prayer to God, then WOW...
that takes away ones most intimate and important part of their(or your) relationship with God
it's worth speaking against.

It's not my place to force others to live by my standards (but I have before).

me neither, but you are here trying to show your understanding to be correct, just as i am.

If a new dress makes my wife look fat in my opinion, yet she's glowing because she feels terrific, why would I tell her my opinion? Why would I devastate her confidence and self-confidence because I only saw the appearance I perceived, and did not see the beauty she exuded?
I could only do that if I loved my own opinion more than I loved her.

well, what if her dress was inappropriate?
being a family member that loves her, wouldn't you tell her your opinion then?

the point is that some things are harmfull, and some things are not.
if you are praying in such a way, that God Himself only hears unintelligent utterances,
then that is a real bad thing and something to be taught against.

one way to do that, is to teach the truth about 1Cor14,
and how it has nothing to do with the ecstatic or otherwise, unintelligible /charismatic uttering prayer "language" of today.

There's not enough historical evidence that I could find to get a clear picture of the early Corinthian church, other than multi-cultural and pagan practices which may or may not have included unintelligible utterances.

i am not saying they were chanting or using a special prayer language.
i never thought that.
the chapter is not about that.
however, through the chapter, we can learn how it is not a good thing if others cannot understand your words.

is there enough biblical evidence for us to understand what prayer to God is,
by way of intelligent words and thoughts, worship and petitions?
did Jesus teach us how to pray?
did He mention this type of so called charismatic prayer?

Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. (KJV)

Paul didn't oppose the practice, but used it to point to Christ.

i'm sorry but you are just wrong here.
he sure did oppose it.

19And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?
20For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean.
21(For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)
22Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. 23For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
​

Paul outright tells them they ignorantly worship this unknown god, and that they are too supersticious.
then He preaches the Gospel to them

Do you put up a tree at Christmas? Do you do so in December? Do you buy chocolate eggs and bunnies at easter? Do you abstain from work on Sunday? Or Saturday? What do you practice in your walk with Christ that has pagan roots?

i agree that many of our practices come from pegan roots
but as i said earlier, some things are very harmfull to the Body.

Prove to me with facts, not opinions, that the chapter is conclusivley not about charismatic utterances.

that is what i have been attempting to do.
the proof is in the context itself.
the chapter does not waiver from it's purpose and it is never about charismatic utterances.
it is about the proper way vs the improper way to spread the Word of God/Jesus in a multi-lingual setting.

9So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

23If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues(each their own language), and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
​

But if you want to debate corporate, chararismatic tongues as a practice then propose a new debate and maybe someone will take you up on it.

since i don't believe either is "Godly" or "biblical" with regards to charismatic tongues,
it would be irrelevant.
but i assume you are one who does so in private and not in public.

 

[James-49]

Since this is the last post I'll try and avoid open ended questions that you can't answer as there's no more posting to this debate, but I may need to make some assumptions which I'll note if I do.

Arrogance and humility can't walk together.

i'm sorry u feel that way.

It's not about my feeling any particular way. I meant my comment the same as saying, "using the pipe wrench on the the tub spout will damage the chrome finish".

-----------------------------------------

this debate, at least for me, is more about how believing that this chapter is about the charismatic prayer practice makes void the truth of the Word of God in this chapter.

For me it was that the chapter isn't limited to human language only.

-----------------------------------------

if you are not, my appologies, but i specifically wanted to debate someone with that understanding, that practices such.

Thank you. I mentioned in my previous post that I've experienced answers specific to my hopes, but it's been a lot of years since I last prayed in that fashion. When we were looking at this debate, before it became official, I posted that I agree with you in principal that there are charismatic practices that have been "misapplied" (politest word), but the idea that the chapter was proposed as being solely human language is what prompted me to take the challenge.

It was never my intention to prove any group, or myself, as right. It was an opportunity to search what is right.

-----------------------------------------

if you are praying in such a way, that God Himself only hears unintelligent utterances,

I find this position confusing. It's not possible to hide things from God by using a nonsensical language. And God Himself could not hear only unintelligent utterances because he sees the heart. So following other points you have made, I'm going to assume you mean God won't regard the prayer because the person who prays this way isn't thinking about it, so there's no prayer there for God to hear.

But Paul says:
1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (KJV)

Not "your understanding", but "my understanding". Paul is stating if he speaks in an unknown tongue, he himself doesn't know what he is saying, but there is indeed prayer happening.

-----------------------------------------

it's when folks of similar practice say that they do not think of what they are saying before hand, and that the unknowable utterances just kinda flow from the heart so to speak.
they don't know what to pray but the Spirit does, they say.

It's impossible for us to stop thinking, short of death of the body. Often folks who say they do not think beforehand obviously don't have the correct words (yes, an irony) because thinking and associated hopes are what compel us to pray in the first place.

-----------------------------------------

the proof is in the context itself.
the chapter does not waiver from it's purpose and it is never about charismatic utterances. it is about the proper way vs the improper way to spread the Word of God/Jesus in a multi-lingual setting.

I don't see the chapter being about the proper way vs the improper way to spread the Word of God/Jesus in a multi-lingual setting, any more than chapter 5 was about the proper way vs the improper way to spread the Word of God/Jesus in a fornication setting, or in a lawsuit setting from chapter 6.
Paul was addressing a specifc church body, and the issues and troubles they were encountering as a diverse group of believers. That`s why he prefaced his point:
1Co 1:23a If therefore the whole church be come together into one place (KJV)

The purpose of the chapter extends from the purpose of the entire letter:
1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (KJV)

Strong's G3004
lego
A primary verb; properly to “lay” forth, that is, (figuratively) relate (in words [usually of systematic or set discourse; whereas G2036 and G5346 generally refer to an individual expression or speech respectively; while G4483 is properly to break silence merely, and G2980 means an extended or random harangue]); by implication to mean: - ask, bid, boast, call, describe, give out, name, put forth, say (-ing, on), shew, speak, tell, utter.

"by implication to mean" - Paul's purpose in writing was for the members of the church to be like-minded.

-----------------------------------------

As a Christian family we're all adrift in this world because we're waiting on the Kingdom to come. I use adrift as a lead in to another analogy. A ship goes down and people are floundering in the waters, grasping onto whatever will keep them afloat. If one has a seat cushion that doubles as a floatation device and another has only a broken piece of timber, the second will start to lose hope and strength if the first tells him his piece of wood is silly and won't keep him afloat.

That broken piece of timber is not doing him harm - in fact it's instilling hope. Taking his hope is what does the harm.

For many people (not all) their charismatic utterances are their broken piece of timber.

Neither you or I can tell which one is clinging to it, and which one is abusing it.

-----------------------------------------

Hey, I've really enjoyed this exercise with you. I've gained a lot. If you decide you want to propose a debate about certain practices that actually do harm - like saying one absolutely must speak in tongues to evidence their indwelling, or one must give money in order to get back lots of money, or one must submit themselves to leadership authority without question - make it a tag team because I would partner with you on it. I admire your passion and respect your certainty.

I hope you and yours enjoy a wonderful holiday season.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Dear friends,

I'm closing this thread as the debate is now complete. As per the stipulations I had approved a final post in error, please forgive me; I have deleted that post.

God bless you all as we celebrate the Nativity of our Lord!

Mark