Tongues, NOT in the bible. (4)

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Do I have to post here to be subscribed? Since it's a new thread?

Anyway ... I copied and pasted Scripture once and it changed my post to a bunch of (bless and do not curse) things. That's when I figured out why that phrase showed up sometimes.

:)
 
Upvote 0

Mama Kidogo

Τίποτα νέο μυθιστόρημα τίποτα
Jan 31, 2014
2,944
307
USA for the time being
✟19,535.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
It is difficult for me to say for sure? It is not something I myself am forming in my mind. I know I cannot do it if I try on my own. (meaning I can't create anything that sounds like that language in my mind and repeat it, I would fumble and repeat sounds)

I do know that the Holy Spirit prays through me in another way .... those like a heavy burden, and the prayers, if there are sounds, are just groaning, weeping, that sort of thing. I know that is the Holy Spirit praying. It is also far more intense than just praying in tongues.

But the praying in tongues is more like I was saying - I have had times that ministry flows out of me - like teaching a class once? A couple of other things. It is like something comes from inside of me and flows up and out. Very effortless. My mind does not form the words - in fact I have a few times been surprised by what I said! (in English). But the prayer language is like that as well. I don't form words in my mind at all. It just comes out. But not English - it's like a language but nothing like any I know. I hear a few words repeated.

I'm not sure if that answers your question. All I know is what happens, and I can describe my experience of it. But I'm not sure I can really say for sure. I know the Holy Spirit is involved, I just can't say exactly how.
I thank you for responding and trying to help me understand. I'm still not following the concept but I'm trying. Scripture speaks on this only briefly and IMO I think it's over analyzed to the point of this becoming something quite different from what was given. In Acts, we see the gift actually employed. In the letter to the Corinthians we read Paul correcting improper usage. It seems when the event happened in Acts the gift was used to help the unbeliever understand the Gospel. What was heard was the Gospel presented in the native tongue of the people. Many modern practitioners seem to presume one man spoke and they all heard different tongues all at the same time. But reading the account carefully doesn't confirm this. St. Peter speaks saying 'these men are not drunk...". Does this mean that as they all spoke they all spoke the same tongue and the hearers miraculously hears or that different men were speaking a tongue unknown to them and different men speaking different tongue?
I'm thinking the thing that amazed the people was that simple uneducated men from Galilee (Mainly tradesmen and fishermen had suddenly became linguist speaking a real language they didn't speak the day prior. And we have the word utterance translated from the Greek word ἀποφθέγγομαι. It has a very distinct meaning: To proclaim plainly. I see the gift in Acts two as the same gift spoken of in the epistle but I see Paul correcting a misuse of the gift which has caused confusion as they all spoke the same language and it wasn't needed to speak plainly in the hearers native tongue. So why would a newcomer think they were crazy? If everyone in a group spoke English and I decided to speak Spanish with my native tongue being English it would not seem a sane choice. It would also not help those hearing without a translator. It would only edify me knowing I had the ability.
So I'm wondering why we'd be given utterance (the ability to speak or proclaim plainly) in an unknown tongue unless one or more present used that tongue as his main language? Why would I be given the language of angels to speak to mankind?
As to the prayer issue. Pray as you think you should and do it sincerely. If the language you speak in is real, God will understand. If it's babble, He'll know that as well.

I have another question: If one is not gifted by God with the gift of tongues, how would her spirit pray? Or could her spirit pray?
Please don't be offended. I know there is more to this than I understand. I know there is a reason people practice this that goes beyond my understanding. If I've offended I ask your forgiveness. I know we all take our beliefs personal. Whether I agree or not is not important. That I understand you is important to me.
In love
Lilly
 
  • Like
Reactions: sunlover1
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟94,511.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Originally Posted by Digout
...
What I meant was that you can pray only with your spirit, not Spirit. Please note the big difference between 's' and 'S'. ...
Norinn Radd responded thus:
This is fanciful, I'm afraid. The Greek text is all caps, no lower-case. Choices between "S" and "s" are made by the translators. In case you're interested -- which I doubt -- Gordon Fee, in his book God's Empowering Presence, makes the case that in many cases, at least in the Pauline corpus, "s/Spirit" would be appropriate, because often in the believer, the activity of the human spirit and that of the Holy Spirit are overlapping and intimately related. __________________
Great point, thanks
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I thank you for responding and trying to help me understand. I'm still not following the concept but I'm trying. Scripture speaks on this only briefly and IMO I think it's over analyzed to the point of this becoming something quite different from what was given. In Acts, we see the gift actually employed. In the letter to the Corinthians we read Paul correcting improper usage. It seems when the event happened in Acts the gift was used to help the unbeliever understand the Gospel. What was heard was the Gospel presented in the native tongue of the people. Many modern practitioners seem to presume one man spoke and they all heard different tongues all at the same time. But reading the account carefully doesn't confirm this. St. Peter speaks saying 'these men are not drunk...". Does this mean that as they all spoke they all spoke the same tongue and the hearers miraculously hears or that different men were speaking a tongue unknown to them and different men speaking different tongue?
I'm thinking the thing that amazed the people was that simple uneducated men from Galilee (Mainly tradesmen and fishermen had suddenly became linguist speaking a real language they didn't speak the day prior. And we have the word utterance translated from the Greek word ἀποφθέγγομαι. It has a very distinct meaning: To proclaim plainly. I see the gift in Acts two as the same gift spoken of in the epistle but I see Paul correcting a misuse of the gift which has caused confusion as they all spoke the same language and it wasn't needed to speak plainly in the hearers native tongue. So why would a newcomer think they were crazy? If everyone in a group spoke English and I decided to speak Spanish with my native tongue being English it would not seem a sane choice. It would also not help those hearing without a translator. It would only edify me knowing I had the ability.
So I'm wondering why we'd be given utterance (the ability to speak or proclaim plainly) in an unknown tongue unless one or more present used that tongue as his main language? Why would I be given the language of angels to speak to mankind?
As to the prayer issue. Pray as you think you should and do it sincerely. If the language you speak in is real, God will understand. If it's babble, He'll know that as well.

I have another question: If one is not gifted by God with the gift of tongues, how would her spirit pray? Or could her spirit pray?
Please don't be offended. I know there is more to this than I understand. I know there is a reason people practice this that goes beyond my understanding. If I've offended I ask your forgiveness. I know we all take our beliefs personal. Whether I agree or not is not important. That I understand you is important to me.
In love
Lilly

Thank you, Lilly,

No, you are very kind, and not at all offensive. :) And I would be happy to explain as much as I am able. I can't explain much theologically - I did read the Scriptures about it, but not study deeply. I have mostly my experience (and I know in much of the Church that is not a thing to be trusted - and I would agree - but my circumstances of coming to the Lord were kind of unusual and through His mercy He helped me anyway. I do certainly check everything with Scripture).

I can't say for sure, but I think there are perhaps two different things going on. I think it is possible that in Acts 2, these tongues were known languages given as a sign to those travelers for the sake of them accepting the Gospel.

In the other times it speaks of tongues after conversion/baptism/tongues (or in the case of Cornelius' household, before baptism) ... I am not sure. It may be a known language, or I think very possible it may also be a prayer language.

I think prayer language is an unknown tongue. It may be a different gift than what we see in Acts. 2. The Scriptures say that it edifies the believer, that mysteries are being spoken to God, that the mind is unfruitful. There is mention that it involves giving thanks to God, and if done in public it should always be interpreted.

In Paul's letters to the churches, I am not sure. I assumed (I may be wrong) that people were speaking in their prayer language, and because no one understood, it was fruitless to the body, but if someone interpreted, it could edify the body. And he also said it should be done in order, 2 or at most 3 at a time, so I get the idea there may have been a lot of unruly speaking going on.

But if it was an unknown tongue, one could pray for the Holy Spirit to reveal the interpretation, I am thinking, since interpretation of tongues is one of the listed spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. I think maybe that was the expectation in church. I have no experience with that. When I have heard a public tongue, I always pray for an interpretation. I sometimes get very vague impressions, and they are sometimes somewhat related to what is said, but only very vaguely. And sometimes I get nothing at all.

OH WAIT!!! I just remembered, the first time I ever heard a tongue in church! I had forgotten ... I was scared to death, LOL. I did pray for understanding of what was going on, because while I had prayed in tongues myself, I was always very restrained and this church was not - it was a bit of a shock for me! And I DID get words in my mind that time, and they DID match what someone interpreted. Not word for word, but the thing that was said was the same. It was about praying for Israel. I had forgotten that for some years. But ... at no other time have I ever known the interpretation of a tongue, though I pray each time I hear one. (It is a fairly rare thing in churches I attend though, so it has been probably less than 20-30 times at the very most over the years.)

I wish I could answer your real question, about someone's spirit praying. I don't know.

I touched all of this by reading about contemplative prayer. Madame Guyon's book was the one I was reading at the time. I also read books about surrendering to God - speaking of absolute surrender. I think somehow it was important to me to be waiting silently on God - be still and know that I am God. And also to be completely and fully surrendered to Him. This is the way He brought me into things. And having a heart that would lose itself in worship of Him.

And intercession is also related to all of this. That may be something of the answer to your question about one's spirit praying. I used to pray all the time for other people. For a while it was amazing, how I saw answers to prayer. I do know that I myself have to be right with God before He will lead me to pray extensively for others.

First I pray with understanding, based on what people ask me to pray. I focused on that for some time. Then something else began to happen. I would sometimes know without someone telling me what they needed prayer for. I once knew of a secret sin someone was hiding, and I couldn't figure out why God would reveal that to me. I was horrified that I might have to confront them about it! But that was not it. Instead, I was to pray. I prayed for that person for some months (he moved away, and I kept praying) and one day I knew it was time to stop praying for that. I don't know if he stopped sinning, or what, but I knew not to pray anymore. Sometimes I pray for someone, and I think I will ask for this, then that, then something else, and somewhere in my "list" my lips speak some words I did not plan to say - something I did not know about them. And then one day, I found out about a grievous sin against some innocents, and I was burdened about it. I started to pray for the children, and something happened I did not understand at the time. That was when it was like a huge, heavy weight pressed down on me, and I could only kneel on my face on the floor, and that was the deep groaning, I wept, I felt like I was being wrung out, and it felt almost like a string was drawn from inside me that went upward. I don't know. It went on for some time, and I just kept being weighted, and feeling great spasms of groaning - then very suddenly it stopped. It was very strange to me. That, I think, is the Holy Spirit praying through me. It is very intense. It happened at other times too. Often it was in prayers for children, but not always. Usually I think I am praying a normal prayer, and I just begin to pray, and that comes on me. That is the one thing I do not control. It just happens. I suppose I could probably resist it, but it doesn't seem to be the thing to do, so I don't.

I'm not sure if any of those is my spirit praying. Anything that is unusual - I tend to attribute to the Holy Spirit. I never thought to ask? I will pray, since you asked, and if I get any insight, I will share it with you.

I think the other prayers are all intercession. But I think praying in the unknown tongue/prayer language is much more likely to be praise or thanksgiving.

I do wish I could answer your question. You seem such a kind person, and I want to be able to tell you ... it's just not something I know the answer to. I'm not sure if any of all these details can help, but if they can, you are welcome to them.

I feel kind of strange about posting this. I have shared more details here in this thread than I have ever done before, and this post is even more. But my heart is touched to help you with what you want to understand in any way I can, so I hope it can help somewhat.

Thank you for your kindness in posting, and be blessed.
 
Upvote 0

NorrinRadd

Xian, Biblicist, Fideist, Pneumatic, Antinomian
Sep 2, 2007
5,571
595
Wayne Township, PA, USA
✟8,652.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
At about this point, Sheldon Cooper would say, "The conversation is starting to circle. Meeting adjourned." :D But since we're fresh into a new "split" of the thread, and since you're pretty new to the exchange, I'll repeat a few things from hundreds of posts in the past.

I thank you for responding and trying to help me understand. I'm still not following the concept but I'm trying. Scripture speaks on this only briefly and IMO I think it's over analyzed to the point of this becoming something quite different from what was given. In Acts, we see the gift actually employed.

I will note immediately that in Acts we see it three different places. For some reason virtually everyone focuses on Acts 2, almost to the exclusion of Acts 10 and Acts 19, and extracts too much from that first occurrence.


In the letter to the Corinthians we read Paul correcting improper usage. It seems when the event happened in Acts the gift was used to help the unbeliever understand the Gospel. What was heard was the Gospel presented in the native tongue of the people.

I would tend to understand it this way if Chapter 2 jumped immediately from v. 11 to v. 41, and if the accounts in Acts 10 and Acts 19 were absent.

But there is no mention that the "wonders of God" (NIV2), or "great <things>" or "magnificent <deeds>" refers to the Gospel, while later in the chapter Peter gives an explanation of the event AND a brief presentation of the Gospel. The events in Acts 10 and 19 make even more clear that preaching the Gospel is not a function of speaking in tongues, while Acts 10 shows that one function is "magnifying" or "exalting" God -- which to many of us sounds like another description of "declaring the wonders of God."


Many modern practitioners seem to presume one man spoke and they all heard different tongues all at the same time. But reading the account carefully doesn't confirm this.

If you believe this is the Pentecostal view, I believe you misunderstand. Generally speaking, Pentecostals hold one of two main views:

-- All those gathered (possibly the entire 120 men and women of 1:14-15) in the place (possibly the "upper room" of 1:13, possibly not, but certainly near the Temple) began praying in a Spirit-given language they themselves did not understand. God caused many of the pilgrims to hear the words in their own native languages.

-- All those gathered began praying in Spirit-given languages they themselves did not understand. They spoke many different languages, some possibly not human, but the native languages of many of the pilgrims were among the ones spoken.

St. Peter speaks saying 'these men are not drunk...". Does this mean that as they all spoke they all spoke the same tongue and the hearers miraculously hears or that different men were speaking a tongue unknown to them and different men speaking different tongue?

I believe the latter.


I'm thinking the thing that amazed the people was that simple uneducated men from Galilee (Mainly tradesmen and fishermen had suddenly became linguist speaking a real language they didn't speak the day prior.

Yes, but they were probably also amazed by the SOUND of loud wind in the absence of ACTUAL wind.


And we have the word utterance translated from the Greek word &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#966;&#952;&#8051;&#947;&#947;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953;. It has a very distinct meaning: To proclaim plainly.

Interesting. Most of the lexicons I have at hand render it rather simply as "declare." Middle Liddel-Scott-Jones does give a meaning close to yours, "to speak one's opinion plainly."

OTOH, the only Bible translation that comes close is the NAB -- "enabled to proclaim," rather than "gave the utterance." Several say "as the Spirit enabled them," with no direct translation of apophtheggomai. The NET gives the translation note that it is literally, "as the Spirit gave them to utter," and notes that "apophtheggomai was used of special utterances in Classical Greek."

In any case, the issue is WHAT they were proclaiming plainly. Was it the Gospel, or was it more broadly and generally the wonders of God?


I see the gift in Acts two as the same gift spoken of in the epistle but I see Paul correcting a misuse of the gift which has caused confusion as they all spoke the same language and it wasn't needed to speak plainly in the hearers native tongue. So why would a newcomer think they were crazy? If everyone in a group spoke English and I decided to speak Spanish with my native tongue being English it would not seem a sane choice. It would also not help those hearing without a translator. It would only edify me knowing I had the ability.

We believe even the person speaking in the Spirit-given language does not understand the language, unless the Spirit also gives the gift of interpretation of languages. (If the person speaking in the Spirit-given language always understood that language, there would be no need for the separate gift of interpretation. Also, Paul explicitly affirms that when he prays in a Spirit-given language, his mind is unfruitful -- 14:14).


So I'm wondering why we'd be given utterance (the ability to speak or proclaim plainly) in an unknown tongue unless one or more present used that tongue as his main language?

We believe the purpose of the gift is to offer prayer and praise to God in a way that is not limited to our native language. In any case, in Acts 10 and Acts 19, no one is present that would necessitate "tongues" for communication with them.


Why would I be given the language of angels to speak to mankind?

Whether human languages or angelic, in 1 Cor. 14 Paul sets forth principles that include never using the gift in public in the absence of someone known to be able to interpret. But it should be noted these principles were given specifically to a disorderly church as pragmatic guidelines for curbing abuses and selfish behavior. None of the rules were followed in Acts 2, 10, or 19.


As to the prayer issue. Pray as you think you should and do it sincerely. If the language you speak in is real, God will understand. If it's babble, He'll know that as well.

I have another question: If one is not gifted by God with the gift of tongues, how would her spirit pray? Or could her spirit pray?

In the context of 1 Cor. 14, "pray with the spirit (or Spirit)" clearly means "pray using a Spirit-given language."

Traditionally, Pentecostals regard Eph. 6:18 as meaning the same thing, partly because of the similar phrasing ("pray in the Spirit or spirit" and "pray with the Spirit or spirit", and partly because both are written by Paul. Traditionally, Pentecostals view Jude 1:20 as meaning the same thing because of the similar wording, including the allusion to building oneself up, even though it was not written by Paul.

I held that view for years, but recently I've come to agree with those who suggest those verses outside of 1 Cor. 14 *include* praying in Spirit-given languages, but do not mean that exclusively. In 1 Cor. 14, the unfolding of Paul's instruction requires him to specifically distinguish between prayers that are understandable by humans and those that are not, and so "pray with the spirit or Spirit" refers exclusively to the latter. In the other passages, such a distinction is not important to the topic at hand, so "pray in the Spirit" is probably more inclusive. It probably refers to spontaneous prayers "from the heart," as it were, and would *include* praying in Spirit-given languages; if there is a contrast, it would probably be with rote prayers or perfunctory prayers.

Similar thinking applies to "sing with the Spirit or spirit" in 1 Cor. 14 and "spiritual or Spiritual songs" in Col. 3 and Eph. 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ~Anastasia~
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
NorrinRadd, the reason why Acts 2 is most frequently references is because it is the longest passage in Acts that includes the exercise of tongues. Acts 10 tells us that the gentiles spoke in tongues and later Peter notes that the Spirit has fallen on the gentiles just as he did on the disciples in Acts 2. So Peter too referred to Acts 2 and thus we're following apostolic example when we do the same. Similarly Acts 19 only mentions that the Ephesian disciples spoke in tongues but gives no significant explanation.
 
Upvote 0
D

Digout

Guest

Yeah, when I get a chance to come back and reply, that's pretty much what I was thinking. I'll accept the fact that I'm in excellent company with Paul. If Paul needed to "grow spiritually", then who am I to claim that I don't?

It appears that you are making a political statement! Our focus should be on Jesus Christ, not on Paul, Peter, Apollos, et al.
__________________
 
Upvote 0
D

Digout

Guest
Subscribing.

originally Posted by sunlover1
Paul mentions that when one speaks in tongues they
"Bless GOD" well.
Originally Posted by Digout
Sorry, you are misleading people.
Please don't accuse me of lying.
And no, I am not misleading people.
It's written.

<b>
Paul never said that.

1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
</b>Sure he did.
And only 2 verses later.
Just as I said, when he prays in tongues
He is "blessing" God.

Says he's "Giving thanks well" too.
How on earth a person can claim that he is blessing God speaking with an unknown tongue? Sorry, it is your misinterpretation of what Paul wrote. Please look up other translations. The statements have word 'if' attached.

 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
It appears that you are making a political statement! Our focus should be on Jesus Christ, not on Paul, Peter, Apollos, et al.

LOL, I'm sorry, but this charge would make a lot more sense if I could lay claim to being a particular disciple of Paul, Peter, or Apollos.

No, I don't really think it appears that I am making a political statement. ;) If it does, then you are really seeing things through very colored lenses. I suspect though that you had to cast about a bit to make that connection and charge, and you know, it really isn't to one's credit to try to tear down other members of the body.

But no, I do consider Paul's words valuable, along with the words of James, John, Peter, and most especially Jesus Himself. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; (2 Tim 3:16)

(And before you come back, yes I am aware that that was written before the NT canon of Scripture was decided, and I am aware it refers to OT writings. However, I am confident that God was similarly able to inspire NT writers as well, and I consider all of the NT similarly valuable.) :)
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How on earth a person can claim that he is blessing God speaking with an unknown tongue? Sorry, it is your misinterpretation of what Paul wrote. Please look up other translations. The statements have word 'if' attached.

The translations that include "if" are saying (basically)

IF you praise God using an unknown tongue, THEN how can someone say Amen (if they don't understand).

The "if" does not cast doubt on what is being done, it is part of a conditional statement that follows, and one reason why it was unfruitful for the Corinthians to be randomly speaking aloud in tongues in the assembly, which was part of why it was out of order to do so.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mama Kidogo

Τίποτα νέο μυθιστόρημα τίποτα
Jan 31, 2014
2,944
307
USA for the time being
✟19,535.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status



It appears that you are making a political statement! Our focus should be on Jesus Christ, not on Paul, Peter, Apollos, et al.
__________________

There is nothing political about that.It's a Christian practice since Christ Ascended. Following the example of good Christian Saints is something we should all do. We do it as they show Christ in their life. They've shown themselves to be Christ-like so having them as our role models will help us to be Christ-like. The goal is Christ and this does not take away from Christ unless we have tunnel vision and can't see Christ in them.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'll repeat a few things from hundreds of posts in the past.

Norrin, I just wanted to thank you for stepping up and answering Mama Kidogo's (Lilly's) questions from Scripture where I was not qualified to do so.

I wished to be helpful, but in this case, I was only able to offer my understanding.

Be blessed!
 
Upvote 0

Mama Kidogo

Τίποτα νέο μυθιστόρημα τίποτα
Jan 31, 2014
2,944
307
USA for the time being
✟19,535.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
The translations that include "if" are saying (basically)

IF you praise God using an unknown tongue, THEN how can someone say Amen (if they don't understand).

The "if" does not cast doubt on what is being done, it is part of a conditional statement that follows, and one reason why it was unfruitful for the Corinthians to be randomly speaking aloud in tongues in the assembly, which was part of why it was out of order to do so.
That is true. An allegory is not always casting dispersion. It's an explanation with an example.
 
Upvote 0

Mama Kidogo

Τίποτα νέο μυθιστόρημα τίποτα
Jan 31, 2014
2,944
307
USA for the time being
✟19,535.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Norrin, I just wanted to thank you for stepping up and answering Mama Kidogo's (Lilly's) questions from Scripture where I was not qualified to do so.

I wished to be helpful, but in this case, I was only able to offer my understanding.

Be blessed!

You were both very helpful and Norrin was sweet in catching me up and sparing me reading 3000 posts to join the conversation.
To Norrin,
The translation of Greek was my own and I'm sure that why you didn't find it verbatium in your search. I just used my memory and my virtual Greek keyboard. It's common to find a Greek Orthodox speaking Greek especially outside the US.
you made a statement concerning the gentiles being found speaking in tongues and I'm wondering how you came to the conclusion that "no one is present that would necessitate "tongues" for communication with them." i might remind you that not all gentiles speak the same language.
You said something before the thread split that I really liked. In explaining that Greek is not punctuated with upper and lower case, you moved on explaining how spirit and Spirit are co-mingled and intertwined. I found that brilliant. I also agree that the guideline given by St. Paul were given to that Church for the very reason you stated and they didn't appear to be needed in the earlier accounts. It would seem the Corinthians had lost focus on the purpose of the gathering and were focusing on the gift rather than the giver of the gift.

Now I will admit you lost me with "traditionally Pentecostals". I live in a small town that boasts the smallest police station in the world (it's a phone booth). We have a multitude of very varied groups using the Pentecostal label. I notice only the AoG and Cog seem to have defined single minded theologies to be adhere to. Could you explain your meaning of Pentecostal? I notice if I see the word on a sign in front of a church they tend to be of the oneness apostolic brand. It could just be a local thing.

One final point:the wonders of God and magnificent deeds describe the Gospel perfectly. It's Good News so wonderful that upon hearing it a person should leap for joy. We agree it is not specified but who do you suppose the Holy Spirit inspires and gives utterance unto to man to speak of? Wound you agree that the result of this event adding thousands to the Church shows us what was being uttered?

You have been very helpful.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums