Members kevinmiller Posted October 18, 2008 Members Share Posted October 18, 2008 1 Corinthians 14:2 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 LOL kevin. That verse is talking about speaking in "tongues" within the church. If someone stood up in my church and started speaking in korean as far as I know no one would understand them. That is what that verse is saying, not that no person anywhere spoke the language. He even clarifies his meaning in verses 10 and 11. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members David Dow Posted October 19, 2008 Members Share Posted October 19, 2008 [quote="kevinmiller"]Paul does seem to indicate that it's a tongue totally unknown, though. He says that if he prays in an "unknown" tongue, a tongue that is not known to man, his Spirit is praying but his understanding is unfruitful. His spirit can pray in a tongue not known to man. I've never spoken or prayed in any kind of tongue but Korean and American(that's a language) but I have some friends who claim to have. I talked to my one friend about it and it seemed to be honest enough, though I can't confirm where it came from(mind or Spirit). I will say that I've never seen anyone pray like Koreans pray, maybe that makes a difference. :dunno:[/quote] Unknown tongue does not refer to a language unknown to man. The disciples in Acts 2 spoke in an unknown tongue but it was only unknown to themselves. They were completely understood by those who came from other countries and spoke in those tongues or languages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John the Baptist Posted October 20, 2008 Members Share Posted October 20, 2008 I agree that it doesn't take place on the scale we see it today. I'm by no means charismatic. But how do you explain Paul saying that he prayed in an "unknown" tongue, a tongue that was unknown, and that his understanding was unfruitful. When his Spirit prayed, Paul didn't understand what he was saying.Kevinmiller quote:But how do you explain Paul saying that he prayed in an "unknown" tongue, a tongue that was unknown, and that his understanding was unfruitful. 1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. 1Co 14:2 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. 1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. 1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. If you notice in the KJV In 1Cor. 14:2 the word "unknown" is in Italics. This is letting the reader know that it is not in the Greek text. The word "unknown was added by the translators to means unknown to the hearer. It was not some special pray language, but a foreign language. That was intelligent to the one who knew the language. 1. The same terms are used for glossolalia or speaking in tongues in the book of Acts as in 1 Corinthians, where clearly they spoke in intelligent languages. Act 2:6 "Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language." 2. Paul instructs the Corinthians to when speaking in tongues or languages to speak clearly where others could understand and interprete. 1Co 14:6 "Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? 1Co 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? 1Co 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" 1Co 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. 1Co 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. The word "voices in verse10 in the context refers to languages. Even musical instruments must give a distinct sound so the hear will know what is played. The the trumpet must give clear distinct sounds so soldiers will know to prepare for battle. This is clearly referring to intelligent languages. 3. Tongues is clearly not a special prayer language as the one speaking in tongues must have an interpreter present.1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. 4. 1Cor. 14:2, is not encouraging the use of tongues as a prayer language. In the context tongue speaking is referred to in a negative light. This is referring to speaking in tongues or a foreign language without an interpreter, which is discouraged. It is not teach the use of some type of tongues prayer language. God bless John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members deanigan Posted November 8, 2008 Members Share Posted November 8, 2008 I'm a student at Pillsbury Baptist Bible College in Minnesota, at the moment I'm studying greek. In my study I have found out a very key idea when it comes to Greek. In the Koine Greek there is a tense called pluperfect this tense means that there was an event that came to pass and it had ramifications, or it continued into the future for awhile, but then it stopped. When I learned about this tense, I immediately began to study the aspects of it. I discovered that every time speaking in tongues is written in a verb form(except for once when Paul gives an example), this tense is used. Therefore in my mind, it is concluded that tongues has ceased. - Dean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Paula Posted November 9, 2008 Members Share Posted November 9, 2008 I would be interested to hear if anyone else has heard of the Koine Greek tense called pluperfect that came to pass and it had ramificaations or it continued into the future for awhile but then stopped? I have been studying my bible and Willingtons Guide to the Bible to try to get a better undestanding of specking in tongues as it is done today. I have some very dear friends and my one daughter that believe in speaking in tongues as it is done at church's today. I am not saying that there is not a time and place for tongues in churchs, I am just trying to understand how something that is not understood, can be of help to anyone in a church service. Or how speaking in tongues over someone going to the alter for salvation is of help to that person. If anyone can help clear this up for me I would appreciate all the help I can get. Thanks, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JerryNumbers Posted November 10, 2008 Members Share Posted November 10, 2008 Paula, My understanding is tongues ceased, and that is what I and our church hold to and I don't know of a Baptist Church around these parts that believes tounges are for our time. 8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 1 Cor 13:8 (KJV) I've studied some with the Willingtons Guide to the Bible got it in the bookshelf and also got it on my computer. I've got another one of Willingtons books that I like, Willingtons Complete Guide to Bible Knowledge, Volume 1, Old Testament people, its come in handy many times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kevinmiller Posted November 10, 2008 Members Share Posted November 10, 2008 whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. Well, I know this is true for some people. lol For most people, though, knowledge has certainly not passed away, but that's not what this verse means. The point is that all things stop at some time, but love lasts forever. Prophecies come to pass and are finished. Tongues are spoken and then cease. Knowledge is forgotten or becomes irrelevant as time changes. Love does not. It is continuing and never changing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 [quote="kevinmiller"][quote]whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.[/quote] Well, I know this is true for some people. lol For most people, though, knowledge has certainly not passed away, but that's not what this verse means. [/quote] The [color=#0000FF]"whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away."[/color] Isn't speaking of all knowledge, it is more than likely speaking of certain things people alive in that day might know that we do not. For example, the apostles saw Jesus face to face, they knew what he looked like, but that isn't something we know. [quote]The point is that all things stop at some time, but love lasts forever. Prophecies come to pass and are finished. Tongues are spoken and then cease. Knowledge is forgotten or becomes irrelevant as time changes. Love does not. It is continuing and never changing.[/quote] I do not think your view can be correct on this. If we were to use the logical standard you are using here we would have to conclude that charity ceases too. After all, no one practices it at all times, and even if they did, everyone alive now will die some time unless the rapture takes place. The passage doesn't really seem to make any sense the the way you read it. :2cents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PastorHarrison Posted November 11, 2008 Members Share Posted November 11, 2008 Biblical tongues (which are in all cases "known" languages) occur curiously consistent with their intended purpose (1 Cor 14:22) as a sign and exclusively within the hearing of their intended audience (1 Cor 1:22) the Jews. Argue this till the cows come home but in the end we're talking about a "sign" gift intended for and found to have occured without exception in the presence of, spoken exclusively within the presence of and without a single Biblical exception to prove (as a sign) something to our Jewish brethren. So what we've got is, for the most part well meaning albeit Biblically niave, those who like Simon are so desirous of getting something "more", something that will gain them a moment of recognition and glory before men, that they'd pay for it, fake it, claim it, fight over it, argue vehemently for it and spend thier life focused on it rather than the Saviour. Of such mindset were the silversmiths at Ephesus (Acts 19:23-29) who bewailed any effort to threaten their beloved Diana and the spotlight which their craft cast upon them.... "you will not take my beloved gift which gains me such attention and prestige down at church"! I give you a paper bag full of $50 Dollar bills..... you dump them out, ignore them and get all jazzed up and excited about the paper bag. You waive the bag, point at the bag, write books and sing songs about the bag, all the while ignoring the thing of value which the worthless little bag delivered..... this is the modern day tongues movement. Ignore the word of God and get excited about the voice upon which it was delivered. Like a famous person arriving in a fancy car....everyone stomps him to death to get a look at the car. The car is just a means of delivery....like a donkey speaking to Baalam or a rooster delivering the last blow to Peter....what is important is God's word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Carolyn Posted November 11, 2008 Members Share Posted November 11, 2008 :clap: Oh yes...I agree, Pastor Harrison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Biblical tongues (which are in all cases "known" languages) occur curiously consistent with their intended purpose (1 Cor 14:22) as a sign and exclusively within the hearing of their intended audience (1 Cor 1:22) the Jews. Argue this till the cows come home but in the end we're talking about a "sign" gift intended for and found to have occured without exception in the presence of, spoken exclusively within the presence of and without a single Biblical exception to prove (as a sign) something to our Jewish brethren. So what we've got is, for the most part well meaning albeit Biblically niave, those who like Simon are so desirous of getting something "more", something that will gain them a moment of recognition and glory before men, that they'd pay for it, fake it, claim it, fight over it, argue vehemently for it and spend thier life focused on it rather than the Saviour. Of such mindset were the silversmiths at Ephesus (Acts 19:23-29) who bewailed any effort to threaten their beloved Diana and the spotlight which their craft cast upon them.... "you will not take my beloved gift which gains me such attention and prestige down at church"! I give you a paper bag full of $50 Dollar bills..... you dump them out, ignore them and get all jazzed up and excited about the paper bag. You waive the bag, point at the bag, write books and sing songs about the bag, all the while ignoring the thing of value which the worthless little bag delivered..... this is the modern day tongues movement. Ignore the word of God and get excited about the voice upon which it was delivered. Like a famous person arriving in a fancy car....everyone stomps him to death to get a look at the car. The car is just a means of delivery....like a donkey speaking to Baalam or a rooster delivering the last blow to Peter....what is important is God's word. Pastor Harrison. :thumb Well, said. Speaking in tongues has ended because we have the COMPLETE Word of God. :smile 1 Corinthians 13:8-10...8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies they shall fail; whether there be tongues (it was a tool for the time), they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. KJV 1611 AV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John the Baptist Posted November 11, 2008 Members Share Posted November 11, 2008 I'm a student at Pillsbury Baptist Bible College in Minnesota' date=' at the moment I'm studying greek. In my study I have found out a very key idea when it comes to Greek. In the Koine Greek there is a tense called pluperfect this tense means that there was an event that came to pass and it had ramifications, or it continued into the future for awhile, but then it stopped. When I learned about this tense, I immediately began to study the aspects of it. I discovered that every time speaking in tongues is written in a verb form(except for once when Paul gives an example), this tense is used. Therefore in my mind, it is concluded that tongues has ceased. - Dean[/quote'] No offense but you are mistaken The pluperfect is a very rare verb, Seldomed used in the New Testament. In Acts 2:4, Acts 10:46, 1Cor. 14:2,4 the present tense is used. God Bless John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kevinmiller Posted November 11, 2008 Members Share Posted November 11, 2008 Speaking in tongues has ended because we have the COMPLETE Word of God. :smile 1 Corinthians 13:8-10...8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies they shall fail; whether there be tongues (it was a tool for the time), they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. KJV 1611 AV. Couple questions: Which part of the Bible was not perfect before Revelation? What part of the Bible was "done away" with after it was finished? The Bible never refers to itself as a group or whole, because it was individual letters and writings before they were compiled a few hundred years ago. So, why would this be the only reference to a whole Bible that didn't even exist until hundreds of years later? This Scripture being used to reject tongues is most likely nothing more than the creation of some pastor who wanted to find a convenient Scripture to fit into his theology. It's nothing more than twisting the Bible for one's own agenda because any honest look at it will make it clear that it cannot be speaking about the Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted November 11, 2008 Members Share Posted November 11, 2008 Couple questions: Which part of the Bible was not perfect before Revelation? What part of the Bible was "done away" with after it was finished? The Bible never refers to itself as a group or whole, because it was individual letters and writings before they were compiled a few hundred years ago. So, why would this be the only reference to a whole Bible that didn't even exist until hundreds of years later? This Scripture being used to reject tongues is most likely nothing more than the creation of some pastor who wanted to find a convenient Scripture to fit into his theology. It's nothing more than twisting the Bible for one's own agenda because any honest look at it will make it clear that it cannot be speaking about the Bible. This is one of those things that's taught and preached so much many people simply believe it without ever looking at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.