Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-21-2022, 10:45 AM
seguidordejesus's Avatar
seguidordejesus seguidordejesus is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 2,752
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
Glossalalia, or "speaking with tongues", is not speaking known languages:

1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
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.

This is why "interpretation of tongues" is a supernatural gift.

In Acts ch 2, all the disciples were speaking in tongues BEFORE any crowd showed up. When they did show up, EACH visitor heard THE DISCIPLES speaking in HIS OWN language, the language/dialect of the visitor. This is not biologically or anatomically possible and so it was a supernatural intervention by God to cause the visitors to HEAR in their own native languages.

If God wants to cause a person to speak in a foreign but known existing language He certainly can do it, but that is not what was happening in Acts.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-21-2022, 10:46 AM
seguidordejesus's Avatar
seguidordejesus seguidordejesus is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 2,752
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 View Post
Could you please be a little more specific with the meaning behind "same".
Esaias covered this in his post.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-21-2022, 05:13 PM
mfblume's Avatar
mfblume mfblume is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portage la Prairie, MB CANADA
Posts: 38,105
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
Glossalalia, or "speaking with tongues", is not speaking known languages:

1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
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.

This is why "interpretation of tongues" is a supernatural gift.

In Acts ch 2, all the disciples were speaking in tongues BEFORE any crowd showed up. When they did show up, EACH visitor heard THE DISCIPLES speaking in HIS OWN language, the language/dialect of the visitor. This is not biologically or anatomically possible and so it was a supernatural intervention by God to cause the visitors to HEAR in their own native languages.

If God wants to cause a person to speak in a foreign but known existing language He certainly can do it, but that is not what was happening in Acts.
UNKNOWN is in italics in the KJV indicating that the Greek never used the term UNKNOWN.

Personially, I disagree wth the idea that the Spirit making each person hear something different than the next person. It is more easily explained by simply saying the languages were represented among the 120. I don't think it is saying that each one of the 120 spoke every language represented there, but rather all the languages were represented among them all.

And, also, the gift of tongues is in the speaker, not the hearer, although it was not the gift in Acts 2.
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.

"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."

Last edited by mfblume; 09-21-2022 at 05:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-21-2022, 10:41 PM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Unvaxxed Pureblood


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 25,464
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume View Post
UNKNOWN is in italics in the KJV indicating that the Greek never used the term UNKNOWN.
He that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God, for no man understandeth him, howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Is that better? The meaning is the same.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-22-2022, 06:33 AM
Nicodemus1968's Avatar
Nicodemus1968 Nicodemus1968 is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Unites States
Posts: 2,351
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
He that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God, for no man understandeth him, howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Is that better? The meaning is the same.
With the underline portion above, do you believe it is connected in anyway to the below scriptures?

Matthew 13:10-13
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.


Also;

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
__________________
""The Government of The United States is NOT, in ANY sense, founded on the CHRISTIAN religion". - Founding Father -John Adams
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-22-2022, 09:30 AM
diakonos's Avatar
diakonos diakonos is offline
New User


 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: N.W. Arkansas
Posts: 2,873
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Huh?
__________________
“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.”
-Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-22-2022, 10:09 AM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Unvaxxed Pureblood


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 25,464
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 View Post
With the underline portion above, do you believe it is connected in anyway to the below scriptures?

Matthew 13:10-13
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.


Also;

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.


I suspect they are, but I am not sure I fully understand the connection. Or at least I am not sure I could explain it very well.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-22-2022, 05:51 PM
mfblume's Avatar
mfblume mfblume is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portage la Prairie, MB CANADA
Posts: 38,105
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
He that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God, for no man understandeth him, howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Is that better? The meaning is the same.
I think that's missing the thought intended to be related to us. I believe that there are tongues of men and angels. And when it says NO MAN, I do not think that is saying no man on earth anywhere, unless it's tongues of angels. Usually, the congregations typically have few if any of another language.

I believe it's more scripturally sound to say that, for example, the day of Pentecost saw every man's language represented among the 120 who spoke in tongues, rather than take it to mean every single person the onlookers appeared to be heard speaking every single one of the languages that onlookers knew. The idea you present sounds as though if all the onlookers looked at any given single person speaking in tongues in Acts 2, each one would hear that same person speak THEIR language at the same time others would hear the same person speaking another distinct language, depending on what the HEARER KNEW. On the other hand, I think each of their languages were spoken by at least one or more of the tongue talkers who actually spoke that language. This puts the miracle in the speaker, not the listener. And if the Spirit gave them utterance to speak in tongues, the tongues are not gibberish. They're actual languages, whether or angels or men.

Similarly, I believe that it's faulty to read 1 Cor 14 as saying literally no man can understand the tongue being prayed. The miracle did not occur in the listeners, but in the speakers. The Spirit gave utterance to the speakers, and did not give supernatural experience of translating gibberish into languages in the hearers. The Spirit giving utterance to the speakers means a miracle occurred in the speakers. To say that the hearers were touched by the Spirit to supernaturally hear the same person speaking Italian to someone of Italian descent while at the same time speaking German to a person of German descent would be the Spirit doing something in the listeners and not the speakers at all. EACH OF THE HEARERS heard their language spoken by someone in the 120 while that same someone did not speak another language.

How can the tongues in 1 Cor 14 be unknown to ANY MAN, and yet the tongues in Acts 2 be known by people due to a miracle in the hearer in one case and not the other? The difference between the gift and the Spirit evidence is not whether God does something to the hearer in one case but not in the other while the other hears a language no one knows.. The difference is only that the gift is specifically to precede an interpretation while the initial evidence is not intended for that It is praise to God that incidentally were known by the onlookers.

Unknown in the case you cited is in italics for the reason you cited. But that still does not mean tongues are not known TO ANYONE on earth, but rather the general conditions where teh congregation wa susually of one language.
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.

"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."

Last edited by mfblume; 09-22-2022 at 06:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-22-2022, 08:33 PM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Unvaxxed Pureblood


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 25,464
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume View Post
I think that's missing the thought intended to be related to us. I believe that there are tongues of men and angels. And when it says NO MAN, I do not think that is saying no man on earth anywhere, unless it's tongues of angels. Usually, the congregations typically have few if any of another language.

I believe it's more scripturally sound to say that, for example, the day of Pentecost saw every man's language represented among the 120 who spoke in tongues, rather than take it to mean every single person the onlookers appeared to be heard speaking every single one of the languages that onlookers knew. The idea you present sounds as though if all the onlookers looked at any given single person speaking in tongues in Acts 2, each one would hear that same person speak THEIR language at the same time others would hear the same person speaking another distinct language, depending on what the HEARER KNEW. On the other hand, I think each of their languages were spoken by at least one or more of the tongue talkers who actually spoke that language. This puts the miracle in the speaker, not the listener. And if the Spirit gave them utterance to speak in tongues, the tongues are not gibberish. They're actual languages, whether or angels or men.

Similarly, I believe that it's faulty to read 1 Cor 14 as saying literally no man can understand the tongue being prayed. The miracle did not occur in the listeners, but in the speakers. The Spirit gave utterance to the speakers, and did not give supernatural experience of translating gibberish into languages in the hearers. The Spirit giving utterance to the speakers means a miracle occurred in the speakers. To say that the hearers were touched by the Spirit to supernaturally hear the same person speaking Italian to someone of Italian descent while at the same time speaking German to a person of German descent would be the Spirit doing something in the listeners and not the speakers at all. EACH OF THE HEARERS heard their language spoken by someone in the 120 while that same someone did not speak another language.

How can the tongues in 1 Cor 14 be unknown to ANY MAN, and yet the tongues in Acts 2 be known by people due to a miracle in the hearer in one case and not the other? The difference between the gift and the Spirit evidence is not whether God does something to the hearer in one case but not in the other while the other hears a language no one knows.. The difference is only that the gift is specifically to precede an interpretation while the initial evidence is not intended for that It is praise to God that incidentally were known by the onlookers.

Unknown in the case you cited is in italics for the reason you cited. But that still does not mean tongues are not known TO ANYONE on earth, but rather the general conditions where teh congregation wa susually of one language.
If "no man understandeth him" means nobody in the meeting understands him, then what would be the point if it was an otherwise known existing language? And further, what actually would be the difference? If a group of English speakers are in the meeting, and somebody starts speaking Swahili, and nobody there understands Swahili, how would anyone even know it was Swahili and not ecstatic gibberish? (By gibberish I don't mean nonsense, I mean a non-existent language, a language not known to ANY man anywhere.)

So I fail to see how your distinction is making a difference.

As for Acts 2, the text plainly says what it says:

Acts 2:6 KJV
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Every man - singular, each individual visitor.

Them - plural, the disciples who were speaking with other tongues.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-23-2022, 02:06 PM
mfblume's Avatar
mfblume mfblume is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portage la Prairie, MB CANADA
Posts: 38,105
Re: Are Tongues Real?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
If "no man understandeth him" means nobody in the meeting understands him, then what would be the point if it was an otherwise known existing language?
The point is that they should not be speaking publicly in tongues, the overall point of the entire chapter. They're speaking to God.

Quote:
And further, what actually would be the difference? If a group of English speakers are in the meeting, and somebody starts speaking Swahili, and nobody there understands Swahili, how would anyone even know it was Swahili and not ecstatic gibberish?
Not sure what you're asking. Let me try to respond what I think you are saying. If English students are there, and someone speaks Swahili, nobody understands him, it matters not if they know it's Swahili or not. Paul is saying hat they are praying to God and such prayer is not meant to be heard by anyone else. So, stop praying in tongues aloud, since it's prayer TO GOD.

The only time it should be spoken aloud is to precede an interpretation.

Quote:
(By gibberish I don't mean nonsense, I mean a non-existent language, a language not known to ANY man anywhere.)

So I fail to see how your distinction is making a difference.

As for Acts 2, the text plainly says what it says:

Acts 2:6 KJV
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Every man - singular, each individual visitor.

Them - plural, the disciples who were speaking with other tongues.

Some scholars believe that if a Roman approached any given tongue talker, that speaker would immediately begin speaking to the man in Latin. If a Greek approached the speaker, that same person would change and speak Greek, etc.

I think that's more reasonable.
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.

"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
tongues as evidence of HG and gift of tongues Sister Alvear Fellowship Hall 1 12-29-2018 09:47 PM
Real tongues or fake tongues? Timmy Fellowship Hall 53 09-08-2013 05:29 AM
It's Real dkmv2006 The Music Room 21 05-21-2013 05:43 PM
Yes.. this is real Apocrypha Fellowship Hall 39 05-27-2010 08:35 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by shag

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.