Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This is what Isaiah is talking about, it's fulfilled here.
-CryptoLutheran
Thanks for confirming, I was wondering why Strong in Him liked that reply you made to my post, when that post was directed to him. =)
She likely agreed with it, just as I was agreeing with what she was saying in this thread.
-CryptoLutheran
Isaiah 28, judgement on the leaders of Ephraim and Judah, has nothing to do with the situation in Corinth, disorder and boasting in the church.
But if that was the intent, why do you think Paul used Isaiah 28 instead, when he stated that tongues are for a sign to unbelieving Jews?
You do agree that, when Isaiah 28:11-12 were written, the Jews were in exile and under judgement then?
There is a hermeneutics problem when one takes one single verse out of a chapter and forms a doctrine on it, while ignoring all the other relevant verses in the chapter. In actual fact, in 1 Corinthians 14, there is much more to the gift of tongues than just the one verse about it being a sign to unbelievers.In the final 4 paragraphs
Acts 2:11 was when those particular tongues WERE a sign to the unbelievers present.If your theory is correct, they would most likely be speaking about the "Good News" and not judgment.
Acts 2:11
"we hear in our own tongues the wonderful works of God ".
Blessings.
Paul wrote his letters to deal with particular issues that existed in the various churches he wrote to. Therefore when he wrote to the Corinthian church, he dealt with their particular issues. But in the other churches, the use of tongues was not an issue that needed correction, so Paul didn't see the need to mention it to them. Because the other churches would have received copies of Paul's letter to the Corinthians, they would have read it, and received the warning not to allow the misuse of tongues to become an issue in their churches.We need to read the letter and find out what was going on in the church at the time.
There were big problems in Corinth.
Divisions - some believers followed Paul, some Apollos. Paul addresses this in 1 Corinthians 3.
Promiscuity - the belief that as they were saved, they could do as they liked - 1 Corinthians 5. They were bosting about this, 1 Corinthians 5:1 Corinthians 5:12.
Inequalities, particularly when observing the Lord's Supper - 1 Corinthians 11. Some were arriving early for the meal and eating what they wanted before the others arrived. Others were getting drunk.
It seems that the Corinthians weren't only boasting about their sexual behaviour, but about their spiritual gifts - some thought they were more important because they spoke in tongues. Paul told them that they were the body of Christ; each had their own part to play. He said that of all the gifts, the best way was love, and they should strive for love. He also said that tongues was only useful if someone had a gift of interpretation - otherwise no one would be able to understand. That the gift of prophecy was also important and, if they really wanted to boast, he spoke in tongues more than they did.
It seems none of the other churches had this problem.
At no stage did Paul referred to the Corinthian tongues as "gibberish". 1 Corinthians 14:2 is quite clear about Paul's definition of the tongues occurring in the Corinthian church along with his comment that when they spoke in tongues they were "giving thanks well enough". That doesn't sound as though he is saying that they were speaking immature "gibberish". Therefore it was not about the content of what they were speaking, but a matter of when and where it should be spoken, and in the church, he made it clear that any utterance of tongues should be interpreted by someone who had the gift of interpretation of tongues.I try not to complicate things. I belive Paul was simply telling the Corinthians ( not Jews by the way) to stop acting immature like children basically, stop calling gibberish tongues authentic maybe? Anyhow, Paul is not very clear so one is driven to speculation unfortunately. I belive we must read His "tongues " lecture in full to come to an accurate conclusion. That being said.......
Here is the entire passage so we can( kind of) read in full context:
1 Corinthians
20 Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature.21 In the law it is written:
“With men of other tongues and other lips
I will speak to this people;
And yet, for all that, they will not hear Me,”
says the Lord.
22 Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe. 23 Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all. 25 And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you.
I think that in his version of the chapter there are no other verses than the one about tongues being a sign to unbelievers. I had this conversations with him a couple of years ago, and he has not been able to get off the pot. It seems that he wants to convince us that the whole purpose of tongues is to act as a sign to unbelievers.Yes I am.
The simplest interpretation is what Paul literally said. There is no subtext here, no underlying interpretation. He said what he meant and he meant what he said. Exegesis is comprehending what he actually said. Eisegesis is reading stuff into what he said and thinking that he might have meant something behind what he said.Well, there are several interpretations. I chose the simplest one. If you care to share yours that would be great. Thanks for engaging.
It's called Eisegesis - making the Scripture say what we want it to say, instead of getting what the Scripture actually says. I think that some try to be more spiritual by bringing up "deeper" meanings of Scripture verses and passages, giving the impression that they have knowledge of what the Holy Spirit really means that us of the common herd don't have.As if "calling gibberish tongues authentic" is even an interpretation.
More like a snide remark. A smear against those who operate in spiritual gifts.
No. It speaks of the stammering style of the Assyrian language which was totally different to ancient Hebrew.Sorry I hit the wrong button and here is what I meant to say !!
The Hebrew word STAMMERING LIPS / LA EG means God was MOCKING Israel .
In Psa 35:16 you see the same Heb word , and means with HYPOCRITICAL MOCKERING , in H2611 and in H3934 .
dan p
Paul's teaching on tongues is still relevant today. Christians who speak in tongues should do so in a way that is edifying to the church and that glorifies God however, in current times the misuse has reeled it out of control causing division. Charismatics should be careful not to use tongues for self-promotion, display of power or to achieve a state of ecstasy, this is the Pagan way. Blessings.At no stage did Paul referred to the Corinthian tongues as "gibberish". 1 Corinthians 14:2 is quite clear about Paul's definition of the tongues occurring in the Corinthian church along with his comment that when they spoke in tongues they were "giving thanks well enough". That doesn't sound as though he is saying that they were speaking immature "gibberish". Therefore it was not about the content of what they were speaking, but a matter of when and where it should be spoken, and in the church, he made it clear that any utterance of tongues should be interpreted by someone who had the gift of interpretation of tongues.
Paul, because of their party spirit, he did say that they were acting as carnal men and women being able only to receive milk instead of strong food, so perhaps their immaturity came out through their misuse of public tongues. I think that if he thought that they were speaking "gibberish" he would not have said, "I would that you all speak in tongues". If it was "gibberish" do you think that Paul would be encouraging all of them to talk "gibberish"? Would he be telling them, "I thank God that I speak the same "gibberish" than you all"?
Somewhere along the line, we have to have a bit of common sense when we comprehend what Paul was saying instead of trying to add 2 plus 2 and making the answer as 5.
True. Because the principal use of tongues is for private prayer, there is no one to impress but God Himself in that environment. When tongues is spoken publicly, it is because of love to the brethren and for them to be encouraged and edified through the interpretation. Therefore, any public use of tongues should be done in humility and love for others, and strictly according to Paul's teaching.Paul's teaching on tongues is still relevant today. Christians who speak in tongues should do so in a way that is edifying to the church and that glorifies God however, in current times the misuse has reeled it out of control causing division. Charismatics should be careful not to use tongues for self-promotion, display of power or to achieve a state of ecstasy, this is the Pagan way. Blessings.
I think that in his version of the chapter there are no other verses than the one about tongues being a sign to unbelievers. I had this conversations with him a couple of years ago, and he has not been able to get off the pot. It seems that he wants to convince us that the whole purpose of tongues is to act as a sign to unbelievers.
Source?No. It speaks of the stammering style of the Assyrian language which was totally different to ancient Hebrew.
We have no biblical injunction to pray in tongues. You confuse self-aggrandizement with edification. Tongues ceased according to 1 Cor 13:8.True. Because the principal use of tongues is for private prayer, there is no one to impress but God Himself in that environment. When tongues is spoken publicly, it is because of love to the brethren and for them to be encouraged and edified through the interpretation. Therefore, any public use of tongues should be done in humility and love for others, and strictly according to Paul's teaching.
No, 1 Corinthians 13:8 says "tongues WILL cease" - doesn't say that they have.We have no biblical injunction to pray in tongues. You confuse self-aggrandizement with edification. Tongues ceased according to 1 Cor 13:8.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?