TheSword

I don't often do prayer requests for myself, but could sure use some today. I had been concerned about my pastor and some things happening/not happening in our church for a little while now. Last night I learned some new things that both confirmed my concerns and threw gas on the fire. Our pastor is conducting business in ways that are borderline illegal and absolutely unethical. Several members and our assistant pastor have already left over the last few months, but I've been trying to hold my finger in the dam. I cannot, in good conscience, remain where I am.
I'm distraught over leaving my teaching ministry and starting over.
I'm grieved for the church family and friends that remain and that I'll leave behind.
I'm dismayed about moving my son away from his friends.
I'm distressed about trying to find another church.
I could just really use a hug from God today...

​So, I'm not sure where this is found in scripture, but, as was mentioned above, God commendeth His love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. JOhn 3:16 says "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son..." The 'world', is the lost, in this context. God loved us when we were lost, unsaved and on the way to hell. So, to tell people God hates them, but he wants to love them and save them, is absolutely unscriptural. Seriously, would you be inclined to marry someone who said, "Well, I hate you as you are, but if you married me, I would love you."  Got hates sin, but loves sinners, sent His Son Jesus Christ to die for them, for US. His love for man isn't predicated on our acceptance of Him because He loved us before we loved Him.

Stymie Goatudder? hahahahahaha RevBob The Bible says that "God commendeth His love toward us...WHILE we were yet sinners" and in another place "He first loved us". John 3:16 says "for God so loved the world....". and in the Book of Matthew (I think) it says if we love our enemies, that we are behaving LIKE GOD.

[[[hug]]]

Please pray for me that the Lord will give me wisdom and guidance, as well as that he would protect me from making wrong decisions and choices, specifically in the area of marriage.
I have about 3 semesters left of college, and I am beginning to think about marriage, I know the word of God says it is not good for man to be alone, that finding a wife is a good thing, to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife, and that it is better to marry than to burn.
 
I am horribly afraid of marrying outside of God's will.
I am prone to take control and do what I want to do in areas of this nature, and I struggle so much with this because of the background I was saved out of.
 
I need wisdom and patience.
 
Thanks.

Welcome back to OB. We left the light on for you. 

Howdy everyone. It's been about a year since I last logged on here for anything other than to respond to a personal message, but I think a lot of you may remember me. I feel much refreshed after my time away and the environment looks to have cooled off a bit. Life also got a lot busier while I was away, so I don't know if I'll be able to contribute as much as I did, but I'm looking forward to some thoughtful discussions again.

​I feel I need to interject here on behalf of the hypothetical individual you're describing because the tone of this thread seems to echo your sentiment to varying degrees. This is not an attack on this quoted post in particular or anyone really, but rather a plea to all who are concerned with the issue.
At full disclosure, I was a Mason for a few years (just after graduating college) before I got right with God. I was saved long before I ever even considered that. Many concerns about Freemasonry are valid and wholly agree that a Christian should not be a part of it. However, I would ask that you please realize and keep in mind that just because someone is a Freemason does not negate their claim to Christ. Almost to the person, every Mason I ever knew who fit this description fell into one of two categories:
1 - They did not think critically about anything they encountered in in Freemasonry. Everything is done in highly symbolic fashion such that people who aren't inclined to look below the surface never see anything out of place. A requirement for entry is the belief in a singular deity. Combined with the ceremonies revolving around a narrative about building Solomon's Temple (albeit an entirely fictional one) with many Old Testament references; many undiscerning Christians don't see how it can refer to anything but the faith that they know. They, themselves, have been greatly deceived and just don't understand what the fuss is about. They think they're in an organization that augments their Christianity. They're not devious. They're not heretics. They're not cultists so far as they understand it. They are simply deceived/misguided/undiscerning and need loving correction.
2 - It is entirely a social club. They don't see anything particularly religiously binding and the majority of time spent in/with the lodge have nothing to do with spirituality. They play dominoes and eat chips and cookies. They lean on each other through personal problems. They volunteer with charities and having meetings on public service projects. They just spend time with their friends. Simply put, they don't see it as something in opposition to their faith or in direct support of it. To them, it's no different than the Lion's Club or Rotary Club or even their local DFW. As far as they see it, they're a group bound together by a higher moral standard (one of their tag lines is "taking good men and making them better"). They simply think they're involved in something dedicated to the greater good, and that's all the investigation they think they need. Again, they're deceived, not condemned.
Look, I know all the downfalls of Freemasonry. I came out of it for a lot of a good, biblical reasons; but please don't make the mistake of branding all of its members cultists like Mormons or Jehovah's witness. I know some that are as worldly as the visitor sitting in the pew next to you and some that are as spiritually mature as anyone here and could run circles around most of us in a biblical/theological discussion. Being deceived and entangled by something that intentionally obscures its true nature does not negate their saving faith. They are every bit as much a redeemed believer as you and I. (please keep in mind I'm not talking about all Masons, just those who continue to proclaim Christ)
Yes, they are a part of something that ultimately teaches heresies of all kinds. Yes, they absolutely need to come out of it. I simply ask that you consider their statement of faith and treat them with brotherly love, because I promise you that the people they're entangled with treat them with more of it than what I see posted about them by those who see Freemasonry for what it is. Each one is a soul in dire need of correction and deliverance, and you'll never get anywhere without love.

​I feel I need to interject here on behalf of the hypothetical individual you're describing because the tone of this thread seems to echo your sentiment to varying degrees. This is not an attack on this quoted post in particular or anyone really, but rather a plea to all who are concerned with the issue.
At full disclosure, I was a Mason for a few years (just after graduating college) before I got right with God. I was saved long before I ever even considered that. Many concerns about Freemasonry are valid and wholly agree that a Christian should not be a part of it. However, I would ask that you please realize and keep in mind that just because someone is a Freemason does not negate their claim to Christ. Almost to the person, every Mason I ever knew who fit this description fell into one of two categories:
1 - They did not think critically about anything they encountered in in Freemasonry. Everything is done in highly symbolic fashion such that people who aren't inclined to look below the surface never see anything out of place. A requirement for entry is the belief in a singular deity. Combined with the ceremonies revolving around a narrative about building Solomon's Temple (albeit an entirely fictional one) with many Old Testament references; many undiscerning Christians don't see how it can refer to anything but the faith that they know. They, themselves, have been greatly deceived and just don't understand what the fuss is about. They think they're in an organization that augments their Christianity. They're not devious. They're not heretics. They're not cultists so far as they understand it. They are simply deceived/misguided/undiscerning and need loving correction.
2 - It is entirely a social club. They don't see anything particularly religiously binding and the majority of time spent in/with the lodge have nothing to do with spirituality. They play dominoes and eat chips and cookies. They lean on each other through personal problems. They volunteer with charities and having meetings on public service projects. They just spend time with their friends. Simply put, they don't see it as something in opposition to their faith or in direct support of it. To them, it's no different than the Lion's Club or Rotary Club or even their local DFW. As far as they see it, they're a group bound together by a higher moral standard (one of their tag lines is "taking good men and making them better"). They simply think they're involved in something dedicated to the greater good, and that's all the investigation they think they need. Again, they're deceived, not condemned.
Look, I know all the downfalls of Freemasonry. I came out of it for a lot of a good, biblical reasons; but please don't make the mistake of branding all of its members cultists like Mormons or Jehovah's witness. I know some that are as worldly as the visitor sitting in the pew next to you and some that are as spiritually mature as anyone here and could run circles around most of us in a biblical/theological discussion. Being deceived and entangled by something that intentionally obscures its true nature does not negate their saving faith. They are every bit as much a redeemed believer as you and I. (please keep in mind I'm not talking about all Masons, just those who continue to proclaim Christ)
Yes, they are a part of something that ultimately teaches heresies of all kinds. Yes, they absolutely need to come out of it. I simply ask that you consider their statement of faith and treat them with brotherly love, because I promise you that the people they're entangled with treat them with more of it than what I see posted about them by those who see Freemasonry for what it is. Each one is a soul in dire need of correction and deliverance, and you'll never get anywhere without love.

​How can I keep this short? 
I met my wife while I was dating another young lady. I'll spare all the details, but a couple of years later, we started dating; however, we both felt that after a few months, we should break up. She went to a well-known Bible College and got engaged to a guy while there. He turned out to be a psycho (that's true and not a cut at him) and caused her all kinds of problems. She left the college and came home. By this time, I was 26 years old, and I had decided that I would stay single; however, we started dating again, and the rest is history. So from the time we first met until we married was probably about 5 or 6 years.
In my case, no...not at all. 
As others have said, make sure she's saved and sincerely loves the Lord. 
 Make sure that you and she both SINCERELY love the Lord. I'm going to be blunt here Jordan...unfortunately, people are human. People change through the years. You'll change and she will change. There will be things that you both have problems with later on. I'm not the same man I was when we married, nor is she the same woman. Pride will rear its ugly head in both of your lives...what will bring you through is the Lord. Make sure that you both are devoted to the Lord and that you both are willing to be servants to one another.

As another member pointed out in a different thread, everyone isn't at the same stage of spiritual growth. When the Lord chooses to help someone have more light on a particular topic is something unique between God and each individual.
For instance, I've personally been involved with witnessing to Catholics who came to Christ and immediately recognized their need to separate from the RCC. I've also known of other Catholics who came to Christ yet didn't have any compulsion to leave the RCC for a year or two.
The Spirit moves in one believer to separate himself from his political affiliations, civic groups, clubs or organizations, but doesn't move upon another in the same way at the same time.
It's not always a matter of whether one is living a lie or walking in deception just because they have some connection with a wayward or bad church, group or association; it may simply be a matter of them walking in the limited light they have received at that point.
Hopefully none of us are at the same level of spiritual maturity today as we were ten years ago. Most of us have experienced many big changes in our thinking, associations and overall lives since we first came to Christ and they didn't all happen at the same time.
Since we don't know the heart or mind of another we take a huge leap if we presume to tell another what it is they really think or believe. That's a common tactic of liberals and often plays out like this: a conservative says they don't believe welfare should be expanded so the liberal shouts that what the conservative really means is they don't care about children.
We would all be so much better off spending time in the Word, sharing the Word, seeking to help one another in love than accusing others, name calling, condemning or attacking. Christ says the world will know us by our love one for another. If the world isn't clearly seeing our love for one another, we ourselves are not rightly following Christ.
{So as not to be misunderstood, I want to make it very clear that this post is speaking of all of us (Christians, including myself) and is not directed at any particular individual here or anywhere else}

There seem to be some here who are inclined to simply accept what people say as truth without examining it.
For instance, when someone says "I am not a Calvinist" but then the promote the TULIP doctrines, or "the doctribes of grace",then guess what?
They are a Calvinist.
 
When someone says they are "IFB equivalent" but the group they are actually associated with includes charismatics, infant baptisers, baptismal regenerationist, and the doctrinal statement they are signed up to is ecumenical and universal church, then guess what?
They are not IFB equivalent.
 
When some protests that they are not Replacement theologist but say things like "The church is the continuing children of Israel, children of God.", then guess what?
They replace Israel with the church.
 
When a freemason says it is only a social club, he either does not know about the deeper workings or he is lying - but it doesn't change what the organisation is.
 
Now when someone makes these claims that are not true, there are two valid possibilities:
1. They are themselves deceived and do not know or possibly do not understand the truth; or
2. They know exactly what they are doing, which makes them a deceiver themselves.
 
The point is that just because some makes a claim, that does not make their claim true.
Some of the people in such groups actively seek to hide the truth of what they are and what they are associated with, while some of them do not know themselves the truth of what they are involved in - but it does not change the nature of what they are involved in.
The majority of Mormons do not know nor understand the depth of occultic practice that goes on in hidden places of their Temples. This is actively hidden from the average member, and only becomes known once a person is heavily invested in the group.
When they deny certain goings on, they do so with genuine belief in what they say,  but they are still wrong.

Sword,
Thank you for the gentle rebuke/reminder; it was well said. Though I tried to be humorous with my input, I apologize to anyone it may have offended.
How often we forget that we all were involved in things that we shouldn't have been after being saved. None of us became sinless at the moment of salvation, nor will we be sinless until we're made perfect when we're with the Lord one day. I'll fess up on something here...I was in a rock band when I first got saved, and I continued to be in the band for several months thereafter. The Lord dealt with me about it rather quickly, but it took a while for me to submit and give it up and leave it behind. 
I agree with you; in that, just because someone is a Mason...that doesn't mean they're not saved. I think that like all of us, a lot depends on their personal walk with the Lord. If a person is saved, and they sincerely want to grow, want to learn, and want to please God...they will. I do think that's the key though...to sincerely desire those things. If a person isn't studying God's word, praying, learning, etc., they'll be susceptible to accept things they shouldn't or wouldn't.
​It's easy to point out faults in others when we know something is wrong, and we don't struggle with it. At times, it's hard to comprehend why someone can't see that what they're doing is wrong, but it would do us all good to remember that our relationship as a child of God is a growth process. No matter how much we've grown, no matter what sins we've laid aside through repentance, no matter what we don't struggle with, no matter what sins don't affect us...the fact remains that all of us...still sin.

​I feel I need to interject here on behalf of the hypothetical individual you're describing because the tone of this thread seems to echo your sentiment to varying degrees. This is not an attack on this quoted post in particular or anyone really, but rather a plea to all who are concerned with the issue.
At full disclosure, I was a Mason for a few years (just after graduating college) before I got right with God. I was saved long before I ever even considered that. Many concerns about Freemasonry are valid and wholly agree that a Christian should not be a part of it. However, I would ask that you please realize and keep in mind that just because someone is a Freemason does not negate their claim to Christ. Almost to the person, every Mason I ever knew who fit this description fell into one of two categories:
1 - They did not think critically about anything they encountered in in Freemasonry. Everything is done in highly symbolic fashion such that people who aren't inclined to look below the surface never see anything out of place. A requirement for entry is the belief in a singular deity. Combined with the ceremonies revolving around a narrative about building Solomon's Temple (albeit an entirely fictional one) with many Old Testament references; many undiscerning Christians don't see how it can refer to anything but the faith that they know. They, themselves, have been greatly deceived and just don't understand what the fuss is about. They think they're in an organization that augments their Christianity. They're not devious. They're not heretics. They're not cultists so far as they understand it. They are simply deceived/misguided/undiscerning and need loving correction.
2 - It is entirely a social club. They don't see anything particularly religiously binding and the majority of time spent in/with the lodge have nothing to do with spirituality. They play dominoes and eat chips and cookies. They lean on each other through personal problems. They volunteer with charities and having meetings on public service projects. They just spend time with their friends. Simply put, they don't see it as something in opposition to their faith or in direct support of it. To them, it's no different than the Lion's Club or Rotary Club or even their local DFW. As far as they see it, they're a group bound together by a higher moral standard (one of their tag lines is "taking good men and making them better"). They simply think they're involved in something dedicated to the greater good, and that's all the investigation they think they need. Again, they're deceived, not condemned.
Look, I know all the downfalls of Freemasonry. I came out of it for a lot of a good, biblical reasons; but please don't make the mistake of branding all of its members cultists like Mormons or Jehovah's witness. I know some that are as worldly as the visitor sitting in the pew next to you and some that are as spiritually mature as anyone here and could run circles around most of us in a biblical/theological discussion. Being deceived and entangled by something that intentionally obscures its true nature does not negate their saving faith. They are every bit as much a redeemed believer as you and I. (please keep in mind I'm not talking about all Masons, just those who continue to proclaim Christ)
Yes, they are a part of something that ultimately teaches heresies of all kinds. Yes, they absolutely need to come out of it. I simply ask that you consider their statement of faith and treat them with brotherly love, because I promise you that the people they're entangled with treat them with more of it than what I see posted about them by those who see Freemasonry for what it is. Each one is a soul in dire need of correction and deliverance, and you'll never get anywhere without love.

1. Facebook, oddly enough. I was stationed in Hawaii and she was living in Texas working a night shift so we were about the only ones online to talk to and it just kind of sparked. (I've known her since 1st grade so it wasn't some blind internet dating or anything like that).
2. Not even a little bit. It was about a week or two after I had finally had enough of my backslidden life and asked God for forgiveness and told Him I'd do things His way from now on if He'd just show me how. Our relationship progressed in ways that only God could have made happen. He changed my heart through her.
3. Look for a Godly one that puts her relationship with Him before her relationship with you. Generally, just like what everyone else has said, the number 1 criteria should be that she is a saved child of God. Since you feel called to ministry, I would also make sure you find someone who is as given over to God as you are, or at least willing to head that direction.
4. Make a commitment to put God first and grow together by growing in Him. It takes 3 to make a marriage work: you, her, and God, with Him at the center.

​True and accurate statement. However, some people have difficulty connecting all the dots and working out how everything fits together. Reading a quality systematic theology book can greatly benefit someone seeking to learn; though, with everything in life, must be done with discernment. A good one will only reflect the theology drawn from the bible. Truly, it's no different than sitting down with a pastor and going through everything or sitting through a Bible study on fundamentals.

​I feel I need to interject here on behalf of the hypothetical individual you're describing because the tone of this thread seems to echo your sentiment to varying degrees. This is not an attack on this quoted post in particular or anyone really, but rather a plea to all who are concerned with the issue.
At full disclosure, I was a Mason for a few years (just after graduating college) before I got right with God. I was saved long before I ever even considered that. Many concerns about Freemasonry are valid and wholly agree that a Christian should not be a part of it. However, I would ask that you please realize and keep in mind that just because someone is a Freemason does not negate their claim to Christ. Almost to the person, every Mason I ever knew who fit this description fell into one of two categories:
1 - They did not think critically about anything they encountered in in Freemasonry. Everything is done in highly symbolic fashion such that people who aren't inclined to look below the surface never see anything out of place. A requirement for entry is the belief in a singular deity. Combined with the ceremonies revolving around a narrative about building Solomon's Temple (albeit an entirely fictional one) with many Old Testament references; many undiscerning Christians don't see how it can refer to anything but the faith that they know. They, themselves, have been greatly deceived and just don't understand what the fuss is about. They think they're in an organization that augments their Christianity. They're not devious. They're not heretics. They're not cultists so far as they understand it. They are simply deceived/misguided/undiscerning and need loving correction.
2 - It is entirely a social club. They don't see anything particularly religiously binding and the majority of time spent in/with the lodge have nothing to do with spirituality. They play dominoes and eat chips and cookies. They lean on each other through personal problems. They volunteer with charities and having meetings on public service projects. They just spend time with their friends. Simply put, they don't see it as something in opposition to their faith or in direct support of it. To them, it's no different than the Lion's Club or Rotary Club or even their local DFW. As far as they see it, they're a group bound together by a higher moral standard (one of their tag lines is "taking good men and making them better"). They simply think they're involved in something dedicated to the greater good, and that's all the investigation they think they need. Again, they're deceived, not condemned.
Look, I know all the downfalls of Freemasonry. I came out of it for a lot of a good, biblical reasons; but please don't make the mistake of branding all of its members cultists like Mormons or Jehovah's witness. I know some that are as worldly as the visitor sitting in the pew next to you and some that are as spiritually mature as anyone here and could run circles around most of us in a biblical/theological discussion. Being deceived and entangled by something that intentionally obscures its true nature does not negate their saving faith. They are every bit as much a redeemed believer as you and I. (please keep in mind I'm not talking about all Masons, just those who continue to proclaim Christ)
Yes, they are a part of something that ultimately teaches heresies of all kinds. Yes, they absolutely need to come out of it. I simply ask that you consider their statement of faith and treat them with brotherly love, because I promise you that the people they're entangled with treat them with more of it than what I see posted about them by those who see Freemasonry for what it is. Each one is a soul in dire need of correction and deliverance, and you'll never get anywhere without love.

​Please know that I'm saying this out of concern and not in a condescending tone.
This is a major problem...especially if he's studying God's word...and especially if his mind is already made up on this. The Bible is clear...
1Timothy 5:8
But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.
It's the man's responsibility to provide for his family; if he doesn't, he's denied the faith and is worse than a lost heathen. I realize that there are circumstances; in which, a man may be unable to provide for his family...such as major medical problems; however, if the man is physically able, it's his responsibility...not the wife's.
If you care for this man, pray that he will come to this realization before you marry him.

While I agree with the comparison point by NN and DaveW, there's actually a little more nuance to the explanation that makes it all a little more concrete. In 1 Ch 20:5, "Goliath" is preceded by "achi" which specifies "brother of", thus "brother of Goliath" is clear. In 2 Sam 21:19, Goliath is preceded by "et". This is an untranslatable word that can is used as either a particle to designate a definite direct object (i.e. divides the subject/nominative and predicate/accusative parts of a sentence), or signify "with" or "among" for the following word.
In essence, then, what we have in 2 Sam 21:19 is probably an example of the latter that would woodenly read something like "...slew among/with Goliath the Gittite".  Here's the really cool part, 2 Samuel was written at a time when the immediate audience would be well aware of who Elhanan killed and therefore it wasn't necessary for the author to be as explicit, but rather used elliptical language. 1 Chronicles, on the other hand, was written centuries later to an audience who would not have been as immediately familiar with the events, and the author therefore needed to be explicit.
What we have in the KJV appears to be both a comparison and a faithful rendering of the text as it was intended.

Howdy everyone. It's been about a year since I last logged on here for anything other than to respond to a personal message, but I think a lot of you may remember me. I feel much refreshed after my time away and the environment looks to have cooled off a bit. Life also got a lot busier while I was away, so I don't know if I'll be able to contribute as much as I did, but I'm looking forward to some thoughtful discussions again.

While I agree with the comparison point by NN and DaveW, there's actually a little more nuance to the explanation that makes it all a little more concrete. In 1 Ch 20:5, "Goliath" is preceded by "achi" which specifies "brother of", thus "brother of Goliath" is clear. In 2 Sam 21:19, Goliath is preceded by "et". This is an untranslatable word that can is used as either a particle to designate a definite direct object (i.e. divides the subject/nominative and predicate/accusative parts of a sentence), or signify "with" or "among" for the following word.
In essence, then, what we have in 2 Sam 21:19 is probably an example of the latter that would woodenly read something like "...slew among/with Goliath the Gittite".  Here's the really cool part, 2 Samuel was written at a time when the immediate audience would be well aware of who Elhanan killed and therefore it wasn't necessary for the author to be as explicit, but rather used elliptical language. 1 Chronicles, on the other hand, was written centuries later to an audience who would not have been as immediately familiar with the events, and the author therefore needed to be explicit.
What we have in the KJV appears to be both a comparison and a faithful rendering of the text as it was intended.

While I agree with the comparison point by NN and DaveW, there's actually a little more nuance to the explanation that makes it all a little more concrete. In 1 Ch 20:5, "Goliath" is preceded by "achi" which specifies "brother of", thus "brother of Goliath" is clear. In 2 Sam 21:19, Goliath is preceded by "et". This is an untranslatable word that can is used as either a particle to designate a definite direct object (i.e. divides the subject/nominative and predicate/accusative parts of a sentence), or signify "with" or "among" for the following word.
In essence, then, what we have in 2 Sam 21:19 is probably an example of the latter that would woodenly read something like "...slew among/with Goliath the Gittite".  Here's the really cool part, 2 Samuel was written at a time when the immediate audience would be well aware of who Elhanan killed and therefore it wasn't necessary for the author to be as explicit, but rather used elliptical language. 1 Chronicles, on the other hand, was written centuries later to an audience who would not have been as immediately familiar with the events, and the author therefore needed to be explicit.
What we have in the KJV appears to be both a comparison and a faithful rendering of the text as it was intended.

I typically do 5-10 chapters chronologically, a Psalm, and a Proverb for my daily reading and then have a chapter or two that I sit down for more in-depth (usually whatever I'm making a lesson for on Sundays). I'm a big fan of bulk reading combined because it helps me keep contexts and the big picture in mind as well as keep things fresh; but I also believe that you have to get below surface reading on a regular basis as well.

John,
If I may attempt to shed a little more light on the "unknown" aspect of your question. As NN said, the word used for tongue here (glossa) referred axiomatically to a language but also carried the connotation speaking in a language that was not one's native language. Culturally, "unknown" is bound up in the word itself. When you rewind to Acts 2 where the first instance of speaking in tongues is found, a different word is used--dialektos, from which we get dialect--that was usually accompanied by a region or ethnic group that specified the origin of the language. Thus, dialektos implied a language of known origin whereas glossa implied a language of unknown origin from the perspective of the speaker/writer. That is to say, they refer to actual language spoken by existing people/people groups.

John,
If I may attempt to shed a little more light on the "unknown" aspect of your question. As NN said, the word used for tongue here (glossa) referred axiomatically to a language but also carried the connotation speaking in a language that was not one's native language. Culturally, "unknown" is bound up in the word itself. When you rewind to Acts 2 where the first instance of speaking in tongues is found, a different word is used--dialektos, from which we get dialect--that was usually accompanied by a region or ethnic group that specified the origin of the language. Thus, dialektos implied a language of known origin whereas glossa implied a language of unknown origin from the perspective of the speaker/writer. That is to say, they refer to actual language spoken by existing people/people groups.