Tongues, a different view.

[Kiterius]

Again, we cannot build doctrines where the bible does not speak.

Explain how this comment is relevant to the point I made.

 

[Dave L]

There are ancient languages that have died out, or not spoken in the region. I am not going to disregard 1 Corinthians 13:1 just because you don't agree with it.

You still contradict Paul.

“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.” (1 Corinthians 14:2)

 

[1stcenturylady]

All of your understanding falls short. Tongues were also a sign to wicked Israel of looming judgement which happened in 70 AD. (Old Testament terminology used foreign tongues as a sign of judgement several times). Also edification based on understanding happened when someone spoke in tongues. And also edified any hearers when interpreted.

So you must believe that tongues ceased in 70 A.D. If they didn't, then your theory is just that, an erroneous theory. It is clear that Paul was talking about tongues, not foreign language of captors.

 

[Dave L]

Explain how this comment is relevant to the point I made.

You need scripture to support your claims.

 

[Kiterius]

You still contradict Paul.

“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.” (1 Corinthians 14:2)

What is this Del - your favorite verse? The Bible is one grand story.

 

[1stcenturylady]

You still contradict Paul.

“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.” (1 Corinthians 14:2)

I don't disregard those who believe it is only angelic. But I don't disregard Paul who says the tongues of MEN and of angels. It is best not to have a closed mind.

 

[Dave L]

So you must believe that tongues ceased in 70 A.D. If they didn't, then your theory is just that, an erroneous theory. It is clear that Paul was talking about tongues, not foreign language of captors.

I'm only saying in scripture, tongues have several purposes stemming from the single gift.

 

[Kiterius]

You need scripture to support your claims.

Part of healthy debate is also showing where your opponent has erred. The verse you quoted does not say what you want it to.

 

[Dave L]

I don't disregard those who believe it is only angelic. But I don't disregard Paul who says the tongues of MEN and of angels. It is best not to have a closed mind.

God gave human languages at Babel. It is not the gift of tongues.

 

[Saint Steven]

I believe Paul defines tongues as being a heavenly language, and then compares it to prophecy. But this brings up another point. Tongues edifies the speaker. Prophecy edifies the hearers. Why because understanding what is said edifies. So the tongue speaker understood what they were saying in the heavenly tongue, in order to be edified. But they must translate it , or interpret it so others could understand.

Thanks again for this interesting thread. To your point above...

That's not how I understand the personal edification aspect of speaking in tongues.
Though I do not understand the tongues I am speaking in, I am still edified by it.
It builds me up just to revel in the manifestation. So sweet...

Here's a question for you, assuming you speak in tongues. (I imagine so)
When you speak in tongues are you edified because you can understand it?
If so, I want to hear more about that. If not, it doesn't pass the test.

Romans 8:26-27
In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness.
We do not know what we ought to pray for,
but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans.
27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit,
because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people
in accordance with the will of God.

 

[Dave L]

Part of healthy debate is also showing where your opponent has erred. The verse you quoted does not say what you want it to.

I don't see any scriptural support for your claims.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I'm only saying in scripture, tongues have several purposes stemming from the single gift.

No lets not change the subject. Why did Paul put a verse about the Jews being captured by the Babylonians in with a verse about tongues being a sign.

Speaking in tongues has nothing to do with Babylon, so what was Paul saying.

 

[Dave L]

Thanks again for this interesting thread. To your point above...

That's not how I understand the personal edification aspect of speaking in tongues.
Though I do not understand the tongues I am speaking in, I am still edified by it.
It builds me up just to revel in the manifestation. So sweet...

Here's a question for you, assuming you speak in tongues. (I imagine so)
When you speak in tongues are you edified because you can understand it?
If so, I want to hear more about that. If not, it doesn't pass the test.

Romans 8:26-27
In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness.
We do not know what we ought to pray for,
but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans.
27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit,
because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people
in accordance with the will of God.

I think the edification you receive (emotional release) is one thing. But understanding the heavenly tongue was the basis for edification according to Paul. You can scream and benefit from even that.

 

[1stcenturylady]

God gave human languages at Babel. It is not the gift of tongues.

Do you believe Paul was referring to speaking in tongues in 1 Corinthians 13:1 or not?

 

[Dave L]

No lets not change the subject. Why did Paul put a verse about the Jews being captured by the Babylonians in with a verse about tongues being a sign.

Speaking in tongues has nothing to do with Babylon, so what was Paul saying.

All I'm saying is that in the case of judgement, God threatened the Jews with hearing foreign tongues. And in AD 70 the most sever judgement against them happened.

 

[Dave L]

Do you believe Paul was referring to speaking in tongues in 1 Corinthians 13:1 or not?

If you do not have love, even telling the butcher what cut of meat you want is sin.

 

[Kiterius]

I don't see any scriptural support for your claims.

First - address the error you have made.

 

[Dave L]

First - address the error you have made.

I'm not aware of any so far.

 

[1stcenturylady]

All I'm saying is that in the case of judgement, God threatened the Jews with hearing foreign tongues. And in AD 70 the most sever judgement against them happened.

JUDGMENT in general was the only reason Paul mentioned it in the first place. It had nothing to do with Greek Christians speaking in tongues. And judgment was the key to what type of sign tongues was to an unbeliever. It confirmed them in their unbelief when they mocked it.

 

[1stcenturylady]

If you do not have love, even telling the butcher what cut of meat you want is sin.

That is the subject of the whole chapter, but he referred to the tongues of men and of angels. Was that reference to the gift of tongues or not?