This is the section of the original post I've been attempting to address:
"So one of the results of writing this paper is that I've redefined the primary function; the primary function of speaking in tongues is to enable a Christian to offer perfectly acceptable thanksgiving to God even though our minds are still contaminated with hypocrisy. This is possible because the Spirit, instead of our unregenerate minds, gives us the words to speak."
I'm not sure how else to proceed without veering off topic so I think I'll bow out.
Apparently, waysider, your practical challenge to Steve's doctrinal assertion is fine, as long as I am not the one doing the challenging. Switch out your name for mine and, all other things being equal, it becomes explicitly off topic. It seems you can only be off topic if you're me.
According to the Bible, genuine SIT will produce a language unknown to the speaker. There are no documented cases of SIT producing what the Bible says it will produce. If it's happening, it's not documented. Lots of unsubstantiated claims, but people differ regarding the weight of that "evidence." For the purposes of this thread, I would assume them to be true. Outside of this thread, I think they're a bunch of hooey.
(And that, folks, is how you answer waysider's question without expanding the topic beyond what you claim to be willing to discuss).
I finished my project over the weekend by giving it a re-read and edit, and putting it into acceptable Turabian's 8th form. I also wrote a preface. The whole thing came in at nearly 11,000 words, which is about the same length as three standard exegesis papers, or about a quarter-to-a-third of a master's thesis. I gave a copy to my adviser today to proof-read and to respond to. I told him I didn't expect him to grade it, and he laughed and thanked me for that!
The title of the paper is What does the Bible really say (and really NOT say) about speaking in tongues?
Here is a list of the paper's sections from the table of contents:
Introduction
Ecstatic utterance !?!?
So, if speaking in tongues is not ecstatic utterance, what is it?
What does speaking in tongues do?
What else does speaking in tongues do?
Do people have to speak in tongues when they receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?
Speaking about the Holy Spirit giving things, does the Bible really say that speaking in tongues is a gift?
What can we learn about speaking in tongues from I Corinthians 12, 13 and 14?
But wait! Doesn't the Bible say that speaking in tongues ended?
Wesleyan Holiness and speaking in tongues
Including speaking in tongues decently and in order in the life of the Church of God
Sources
Before I started writing the paper I did a brief survey of recent commentaries, just as I would if I were writing an exegesis paper. That's what convinced me that the most common obstacle to understanding what the Bible has to say about speaking in tongues is regarding it as ecstatic utterance, for which there is no biblical warrant.
The next-to-the-last section is about the Wesleyan Holiness movement and speaking in tongues for two reasons, the current faith community with which I am involved not only came out of the Wesleyan Holiness movement itself, William Seymour came out of the progenitor of this very same faith community. There are "camps" within this faith community regarding tongues, and part of the reason for that is Wesleyan imprecision regarding "works of grace."
The last section is "Including speaking in tongues decently and in order in the life of the Church of God." The first thing we have to do to heal the breaches within this faith community is to come to a common understanding of speaking in tongues, and the only way to do that is to find out EXACTLY what the Bible does and does not say, because the Bible is the thread of commonality in the congregations of this community. If we can reach agreement on what the Bible says, then we can reach agreement. That's what the ministry of reconciliation is. The second thing we have to do is figure out how to apply the FREEDOM the Bible gives regarding speaking in tongues while keeping it decent and in order.
Raf, I have always liked and respected and admired you, and I still do! I have to ask you though, how would you like it if you were working on a very complex and extended news story, and somebody else, who has no idea of what you are writing or why, came in and started making irrelevant arguments against what you are writing without even having read it? I ask you, please, to imagine yourself in that situation.
Steve, your post was going just fine until you inappropriately injected me into it at the end. This isn't hard. If you keep discussing me, I become the topic. So stop.
And I repeat what I have said all along: I will respect what you deem to be on topic, as long as it is on topic for everyone. I will avoid what is off topic, as long as it is off topic for everyone. "It's on topic for him but not for you" is rude. It just is.
So no problem. You want this thread to take for granted that SIT is real. Dandy. I won't question it. But if someone else questions it and you, instead of explaining that they're off topic, engage that discussion, then YOU are declaring their questions to be on topic.
You can't have it both ways. Challenging modern SIT is either on topic for everyone or it's off topic for everyone. I point you back to the "Staying on Topic" thread pinned to the top of doctrinal. You may not exclude someone from an on topic conversation because you disagree with his presuppositions (especially in this case, where I reject the notion that my presuppositions play any role in this: at least one poster on GSC remains a committed Christian but agrees with me on modern SIT not being biblical SIT. I AGREE that this is a separate conversation. But when you engage it, you expand the thread topic).
Below is information on speaking in tongues from one of the biblical articles that I have written. Here is a link to the web site with this biblical article, which is the equivalent of a clearly written biblical commentary.
The biblical usage of speaking in tongues over the years has been very controversial among Christians and especially in various churches. Plenty of Christians do not understand what speaking in tongues is nor do they believe in it. Others believe in it, but sometimes do not speak in tongues at churches without a great deal of confusion. With this in mind we are going to do a short study of speaking in tongues purely from New Testament scriptures.
First of all biblically the Greek word for “tongues” here in 14:2 is the Greek word “gloossa.” From the Thayer’s Greek to English lexicon it means literally the tongue as a member of our physical body, which is the organ of speech. Tongues (gloossa) can also represent a language used by a particular people in distinction from that of other nations. To see this let’s look at scriptures, which use this Greek word.
Mark 7:32-35
32 Then they brought to Him (Jesus) one who was deaf and had an impediment in his speech, and they begged Him to put His hand on him. 33 And He (Jesus) took him aside from the multitude, and put His fingers in his ears, and He (Jesus) spat and touched his tongue (gloossa). 34 Then, looking up to heaven, He sighed, and said to him, "Ephphatha," that is, "Be opened." 35 Immediately his ears were opened, and the impediment of his tongue (gloossa) was loosed, and he spoke plainly.
New Kings James Version
Above we see clearly the usage of the word tongue (gloossa) as a body part used for speech. This should clearly tell us that tongues as inspired by the Holy Spirit can include our actual tongue body part with the speaker in control of his own. Next we will look at usages of tongues (gloossa) used for speech as inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:3-4
3 And there appeared unto them cloven (diamerizoo) tongues (gloossa) like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues (gloossa), as the Spirit gave them utterance.
King James Version
Holy Ghost above from the King James Version is the same as Holy Spirit in other versions. In Acts 2 we have for the first time the Holy Spirit, which Jesus promised to give to his followers. Here we see the Holy Spirit coming to Jesus’ twelve disciples looking like divided tongues of fire and sitting on each of them. The Greek word used for “cloven” is “diamerizoo.” “Diamerizoo” is normally translated divided and means to divide or cut in pieces. From this we see a vision or a painted picture spiritually of what occurs with the receiving of the Holy Spirit. We see the Holy Spirit being individually given, but we see every individual gift of Holy Spirit interconnected. In the vision it starts off as one tongue of fire, but then is divided separately among recipients. This is harmonious with Ephesians 2:18 which states “we have access to the Father by one Spirit”, and Ephesians 4:4 which states “There is one body and one Spirit…”
With this they were each filled with the Holy Spirit and the first thing they did was speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance or as the Spirit enabled them. This was prophesied during Jesus’ earthly ministry for example, Matthew 3:11 quotes John the Baptist, “He (Jesus) will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”
It is interesting that at this time we had a festival known as Pentecost or the feast of harvest. According to Acts 2:5, we had Jews in Jerusalem at this festival from every nation with multiple languages spoken and understood. What was noticed by these people from other nations was that there were 12 Galileans speaking foreign languages, many of which they could not have known. People from Galilee were not known for their linguistic ability or knowledge. Some of these listed nations with languages are as follows:
Acts 2:8-11
8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians…
King James Version
Then continuing in verse 11, “we do hear them speak in our tongues (gloossa) the wonderful works of God.” Or stated with more detail, these people of many nations heard the disciples of Jesus Christ speak of the magnificent, excellent, splendid, and wonderful works or things done by God. And this was spoken in a language that the speakers themselves did not know and therefore did not understand. Yet it was all done with their own vocal ability. Next, we see that tongues is also words that “magnify God.”
Acts 10:44-46
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God...
New King James Version
Here we see for the first time Gentiles also receiving the gift of Holy Spirit. Gentiles is a term used by Jewish people to refer to foreigners, or any other people who were not part of the Jewish race. And like the twelve original disciples, who were also Jesus’ apostles, the first thing the Gentiles did after receiving the Holy Spirit was speak in tongues and with this magnify God. Magnifying God is declaring or deeming as great or to esteem highly, to extol, to laud, to celebrate God’s greatness.
To summarize from the scriptures we have covered including 1 Corinthians 13:1, the chapter before this and now 1 Corinthians 14:2 we see that tongues or speaking in tongues is the following:
1.From Mark 7:33-35, the physical human tongue as used for speech.
2.From Acts 2:4, speaking inspired words from the Holy Spirit.
3.From Acts 2:11, speaking the wonderful works of God.
4.From Acts 10:46, speaking words that magnify God or declare that God is great.
5.From 1 Corinthians 13:1, which also uses the word “gloossa,” speaking a language either of men or angels.
6.From 1 Corinthians 14:2, speaking mysteries or divine secrets directly to God and not man.
As we saw in Acts 2, sometimes people can understand what is being spoken in tongues, but this is rare and could be considered miraculous. Speaking in tongues is speaking to God a hidden or secret thing as inspired by the Holy Spirit. The fact that these people of different nations heard the 12 apostles speak in their own native individual languages is phenomenon, and a reverse effect of that which occurred at the Tower of Babel when God confounded the languages. See Genesis chapter 11, verses 1-9. That everyone understood in their own different language in Acts chapter 2 does not normally happen, but apparently this phenomenon was a sign of the importance and significance of the receiving of the Holy Spirit as promised by God. If someone speaks in tongues or speaks in tongues with interpretation, it is possible for someone to know the language or tongue if it is a language of men that they know. However, the person speaking in tongues according to the scriptures will not know the language otherwise it wouldn’t be a tongue also described as a mystery or divine secret to the speaker.
1 Corinthians 14:3-5
3 But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification.
New Kings James Version
Here we see plainly the difference between speaking words of prophecy and speaking in tongues. Both are a manifestation or evidence of the Spirit of God given to followers of Jesus Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:7-11). Words of prophecy are preferred in a church gathering because they are words spoken in the language of those people present. In contrast, speaking in tongues is not a preferred manifestation when spoken aloud in a church gathering unless the person that speaks in tongues interprets in the language of the people present the words that he has just spoken in tongues. This is referred to in 1 Corinthians 12:10 as the interpretation of tongues. Both are the work of the one and same Spirit of God, which has been given to individual followers of Jesus Christ. Remember Acts 2 and the vision of cloven tongues like as of fire, which came as a mass and then separated right before resting on individual disciples of Jesus Christ. This was a vision of the one Spirit, Ephesians 4:4. Just as we have one body with all followers of Jesus Christ a member, we have one Spirit, with all followers of Jesus Christ getting a portion, also called the gift of “Holy Spirit.” And the giver of this gift is God, the Father through His Son Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 2:5
5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
New International Version
Both prophecy and tongues are for edification. Speaking in tongues is for individual edification, which should be primarily spoken quietly to oneself and not spoken aloud in an assembly of believers unless the speaker offers words of interpretation. Later we will see that speaking in tongues is a form of prayer and is specifically called in 1 Corinthians 14:14-15, praying in the spirit. Paul wants everyone to speak in tongues in this manor according to verse 5. In contrast, in a church gathering, prophecy is of greater importance and should be done because it brings edification, exhortation and comfort to the people present. These are three related words as stated in verse 3. Stated in a similar way prophecy brings to the church a building up along with encouragement and comfort.
1 Corinthians 14:6-11
6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues (gloossa), what shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching? 7 Even things without life, whether flute or harp, when they make a sound, unless they make a distinction in the sounds, how will it be known what is piped or played? 8 For if the trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will prepare himself for battle? 9 So likewise you, unless you utter by the tongue (gloossa) words easy to understand, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and none of them is without significance. 11 Therefore, if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to him who speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me.
New Kings James Version.
Speaking in tongues is an important manifestation for followers of Jesus Christ. Personally, I have used it as spiritual prayer for a number of years now. I have also instructed others in this spiritual prayer and then led them also into speaking in tongues. See an example of this in Acts 19:6. However, as the previous section of scripture clearly states, if we speak in tongues out loud, words that no one understands, how will it benefit the listener? The answer is obvious. Unless we speak words that are understood, one can or would merely sound like a foreigner. If we speak in tongues out loud without the addition of words in our common language, for example revelation, prophesying or teaching, how shall it assist or be useful or advantageous to the listener? The answer is, it will not. It will only edify the speaker. How is that being of service to our fellow brothers and sister in Christ? Isn’t that why we as followers of Jesus Christ meet and get together, to serve and help one another?
1 Corinthians 14:12-14
12 Even so you, since you are zealous for spiritual gifts (The word gifts was added. A better translation would be spiritual matters or things.), let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel. 13 Therefore let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful.
New Kings James Version.
Stated again, if we are zealous for spiritual matters or things, let’s focus that zeal on serving our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. And when it comes to speaking words in a church service let’s speak words to edify or build up the church. Therefore, anyone who speaks in a tongue in a regular church service should first pray that he may interpret. Then and only then should we speak in tongues and then we should follow this with the interpretation, in the language of the people present. We are able to speak in tongues and then immediately follow this with the interpretation of the tongue that we just spoke, through the power and ability of the Holy Spirit and through faith in God and prayer. Yes, prayer needs to be mixed with faith in God. So again, before we speak in tongues out loud in front of everyone at a church gathering. Let’s first pray and have faith that we will interpret the divine secrets and wonderful works of God given to us. Speaking in tongues is spiritual prayer and I do it and I like it, but in a church gathering let’s primarily speak fruitful words with our understanding.
1 Corinthians 14:15-16
15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
New International Version
Here the scriptures ask a fundamental question based on all the previous truthful and practical knowledge. “What shall I do?” The answer is to both pray in the spirit, which is speaking in tongues, and pray with our understanding. And when we speak in tongues, if we want, we can also do it to the tune of our favorite musician, musical group or melody. And of course, in a church service we can all also sing one of our favorite hymnals together in the language of the people present. Three of my all time favorites are “I’ve Found a Friend in Jesus, He’s Everything To Me”, “What a Friend We Have in Jesus” and “How great thou art.”
1 Corinthians 14:16-17
16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how can any one in the position of an outsider say the "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17 For you may give thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.
Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright 1952 (2nd edition, 1971) by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Another obvious question with a simple answer. We may be giving thanks spiritually through speaking in tongues, but if no one listening to us knows what we are saying, then no one, but the speaker is edified. If that is the case we may as well just stay home and pray in our closet with the door shut (see Matthew 6:6). Therefore as this section of scripture has said and implied a number of times. If we speak in tongues without interpretation we should primarily do it silently to God in prayer and praise. The main point in this as we shall see is to not bring confusion to members of the body of Christ.
1 Corinthians 14:18-19
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
King James Version
A great summary written by Paul. Paul thanks God that he speaks in tongues, at this time, perhaps more than all the people of the church in Corinth. Nevertheless, in church Paul would rather speak out loud five words that will teach and edify others than ten thousand words in a tongue (gloossa) that is not known by the people that are present and listening to him.
Steve Lortz, I am glad that you are teaching people at the Anderson University School of Theology even though you are also a student there. Being both a student and a teacher is a good thing. We need to learn before we teach. And certainly you are much more knowledgeable regarding speaking in tongues as spiritual prayer and thanksgiving than other people there. With my judgement you get an "A".
waysider - The only difference between free vocalization and speaking in tongues is this: when a person is speaking in tongues, the Spirit gives the utterance (or "ability" as per the NRSV).
How can we know that the Spirit is giving the utterance? We can't from speaking in tongues itself, because no person speaking in tongues understands what she or he is saying. Our confidence that the Spirit gives utterance has to come from our experience of prophecy. Not TWI prophecy, what Wierwille taught was hogwash, but rather from the biblical prophecy described by Paul in I Corinthians 14:22-25. If our experience of prophecy actually has the reputed or apparent qualities or character Paul described, then we can judge that our experience was genuine. That is what is at the heart of I Corinthians 14:22-25
22Tongues, then, are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers."
This could be accurately translated as "Therefore tongues serve as a sign not to the speakers (in tongues) who are confident/convinced, but to the speakers (in tongues) who lack confidence/are not convinced, and prophecy serves as a sign not for the speakers (of prophecy) who lack confidence/are not convinced, but for the speakers (of prophecy) who are confident/convinced."
How does biblical prophecy do that?
When a person who is uninstructed or unconvinced hears someone speak something that goes straight to her or his heart, speaking directly to the hidden issues and questions that reside there, and that person spontaneously says something like, "Whoa! God must have had you say that!" then the somebody who did the speaking can conclude that the Spirit did indeed give the utterance for those words. When I know for sure from my own experience that the Spirit of God can and does give the utterance when I prophesy, then it is reasonable for me to conclude that the Spirit also gives the utterance when I speak in tongues.
Next time, what exactly is going on when a person speaks by the Spirit of God...
Yes, Paul and Acts chapter 2 does say or indicate that it is a language. A person that I know who NEVER was involved with TWI asked me about SIT. I explained it to him. Then he asked me to speak in tongues for him to be able to listen to it. I normally just SIT for my private prayers silently as Paul says to do. However, I did his request. After I finished he then told me it sounded to him like an actual language. Was I then suppose to disagree with him? He simply told me in English that it sounded like a language to him. Yes, a language that he did not know as I did not follow it with the interpretation. We were together with family members and were speaking quietly to each other.
Hey Raf and Kermitt (Waysider, don't mind if I call you Kermitt - any parts of you smell like pork) All aside, here's my question: I have been speaking in tongues since 1972 (what's that, 40 some years) and my tonuge/s change quite frequently and have done so over the years and decades. I SIT alot, often outloud when alone, sometimes just at the lips and more often, prior to making it that far. I do "hear" the words in the ol'e noggin (no, not hearing voices). So,if the Bible says that it is a manifesttion than is it real? Now, I do remember all about those "starter words" and that is a mind thing; I recall how many folks started their tongues the same way that VP did (la shanta). I spoke in tongues prior to completing the PFAL class; that's another story. So, do either of you still SIT, I think I know that answer, in part. I have not read this whole thread but just needed to ask, maybe had I read the whole thing I would have gotten my answer. Raf, you sorry you ever gave me access? My goal is purely personal, saying that makes me think myself self-centered since I have nothing to add but only take - yes, I am then. Can you suggest anything that I can give to help.
Edited by Modgellan (removed inappropriately placed comment)
Some people may or may not believe that SIT is from God and is a language. However, everyone should at least see that over the years people have developed thousands of languages. The many languages have often been for communication, but also some languages developed by people have had other goals and results. For example, the languages used so that this and other web sites exist. These languages are PHP, which I have studied and completed two 16 week college classes in studying. This language used for this web site is used with other languages, HTML, CSS and JavaScript. If mankind can develop many languages, then if God does exist as the creator of mankind, God would be able to develop many languages also. The goal for the languages of SIT are prayer and praise to God and direct and personal communication with God.
Some people may or may not believe that SIT is from God and is a language. However, everyone should at least see that over the years people have developed thousands of languages. The many languages have often been for communication, but also some languages developed by people have had other goals and results. For example, the languages used so that this and other web sites exist. These languages are PHP, which I have studied and completed two 16 week college classes in studying. This language used for this web site is used with other languages, HTML, CSS and JavaScript. If mankind can develop many languages, then if God does exist as the creator of mankind, God would be able to develop many languages also. The goal for the languages of SIT are prayer and praise to God and direct and personal communication with God.
Genuine languages all have a definable structure, a syntax. That's what sets them apart from mumbo-jumbo. The speaking in tongues we experienced in The Way did not have such a structure. What does that tell you?
Genuine languages all have a definable structure, a syntax. That's what sets them apart from mumbo-jumbo. The speaking in tongues we experienced in The Way did not have such a structure. What does that tell you?
This is a false statement of judgment on your part only and nothing more. Are you the one only that should analyze whether or not someone is actually SIT as a language that God has actually inspired or provided to an individual? You are only responsible for applying what you want to apply and not what other people want to apply. As an example, 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that Paul did SIT, while other people either did not or applied it much less than he did. Can you at least read that Paul did SIT? If you can not see or read this then it is because you don't want to.
Also what you are saying now disagrees with someone that I spoke in tongues to for him to actually listen to recently. He told me it sounded to him like a language. However, today when we hear other people speak foreign languages that we don't understand, we often don't see or understand the structure of this human language. This could require actually being able to speak and understand the language spoken, which does not happen with SIT. This is only a language to God for prayer and praise.
Also this is the part of the forum for actual scriptural analysis. You would be agreed to more in the other part of this web site.
It's not a judgement, Mark, it's an observation. A trained linguist can discern whether something is or is not a structured language without knowing what language it is or the content thereof. As far as I know, there has never been a documented case of a trained linguist identifying speaking in tongues (modern variety) as a genuine language. If you know of one, I will gladly retract my skepticism.
edit: This does relate to Biblical references because on The Day of Pentecost, there were people who did understand the language being spoken, even without formal linguistic training.
Mark has already said that Biblical SIT produces languages. I agree with him. Steve clearly intended for this thread not to question the validity of modern claims of SIT. I would love to honor that.
Also SIT biblically unless interpreted in the language of the people present to hear it is only for ones private prayer and praise to God. Unless there is the interpretation in the language of the people present to hear, this should be done silently to God as a form of prayer. And this is one of the main scriptural points of Paul's 1 Corinthians chapter 14.
9 So likewise you, unless you utter by the tongue (gloossa) words easy to understand, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and none of them is without significance. 11 Therefore, if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to him who speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me.
I actually agree with Mark there. We're talking about what the Bible says, not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced it.
And here is some information from the opening paragraph of an article that I have written that relates to the above. Here is a link to the article, Age and the Greek Words.
I appreciate all versions of the bible and learn from them, but none of them are perfectly written after being translated from the original biblical languages to the language of English for our understanding. The work involved in the King James Version for example started in the year 1603 or thereafter and was finally completed for publishing in the year 1611. This was written by an estimate of 47 translators. In contrast, the individual writings of what we see in today's New Testament, for example the apostle Paul's church epistles, were likely originally written by the authors in Koine (common Greek). This was a language that could be understood by almost anyone, educated or not in the years written, 50 to 100 AD. Writing involves editing to be factual and accurate or in the case of bible versions for truthfulness. Again I appreciate all versions of the bible, but all are not the original writings of the authors and editing for original truth and clarity should continue. For example, every time I write a biblical article or commentary after writing the original draft, I see improvement with my additional editing.
Mark, I think you misunderstood me. I wrote: "I actually agree with Mark there. We're talking about what the Bible says, not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced it."
You apparently thought I meant "not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced what the Bible says." Your post makes sense if that was your understanding of my comment.
But what I intended to convey was, "not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced the practice of speaking in tongues as described in the Bible."
I was agreeing with you (at least, I think I was) that questioning your practice of SIT, indeed questioning ANYone's practice of SIT, is off-topic on this thread.
It is on topic for me to ask you whether you believe Biblical SIT produces a language. It is off-topic for me to challenge YOUR practice of SIT. You say you do it. That's fine. In doing so, you are saying that you produce a language when you SIT. (That is a logical extension: "The Bible says SIT produces a language. My practice of SIT is consistent with the Bible. Therefore, when I SIT, I'm producing a language.") If anyone wants to challenge that assertion, this thread by design is not the place to do it.
My point is, I wasn't trying to comment on the accuracy of the modern translations of the Bible. I was merely agreeing with you concerning drawing the on-topic/off-topic line.
Mark, I think you misunderstood me. I wrote: "I actually agree with Mark there. We're talking about what the Bible says, not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced it."
Yes, Raf, I know you were not disagreeing with my posts here. And by me posting historical information hopefully not disagreeing with your posts. Merely, I was giving actual historical information regarding the translation of texts from different languages, for example Koine Greek in order to publish the King James Version of the bible, which is for the English language. Obviously, at least to me this relates to what the bible says, the historical information on how it was first published. Here is a link to more detailed information on this.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
34
14
17
22
Popular Days
Jan 24
19
Mar 14
12
Jan 26
8
Jan 18
8
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 34 posts
Mark Sanguinetti 14 posts
Steve Lortz 17 posts
waysider 22 posts
Popular Days
Jan 24 2015
19 posts
Mar 14 2015
12 posts
Jan 26 2015
8 posts
Jan 18 2015
8 posts
Popular Posts
Steve Lortz
I am taking two classes this year, Literature and History of the Old Testament and Literature and History of the New Testament. During the first semester of OT we studied the history of Israel from "t
Steve Lortz
History and science do NOT demonstrate this to be the case! Genuine biblical speaking in tongues is deliberate and volitional. There is no biblical warrant for equating speaking in tongues with ecsta
waysider
Earlier, you asked me "What is genuine?" It's not a trick question. What criteria do you use to determine if it's real or not? Now I'm asking you, "Were you deluded then, or are you deluded now? Ho
waysider
This is the section of the original post I've been attempting to address:
"So one of the results of writing this paper is that I've redefined the primary function; the primary function of speaking in tongues is to enable a Christian to offer perfectly acceptable thanksgiving to God even though our minds are still contaminated with hypocrisy. This is possible because the Spirit, instead of our unregenerate minds, gives us the words to speak."
I'm not sure how else to proceed without veering off topic so I think I'll bow out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Apparently, waysider, your practical challenge to Steve's doctrinal assertion is fine, as long as I am not the one doing the challenging. Switch out your name for mine and, all other things being equal, it becomes explicitly off topic. It seems you can only be off topic if you're me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I still want to know what constitutes "genuine".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
According to the Bible, genuine SIT will produce a language unknown to the speaker. There are no documented cases of SIT producing what the Bible says it will produce. If it's happening, it's not documented. Lots of unsubstantiated claims, but people differ regarding the weight of that "evidence." For the purposes of this thread, I would assume them to be true. Outside of this thread, I think they're a bunch of hooey.
(And that, folks, is how you answer waysider's question without expanding the topic beyond what you claim to be willing to discuss).
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I finished my project over the weekend by giving it a re-read and edit, and putting it into acceptable Turabian's 8th form. I also wrote a preface. The whole thing came in at nearly 11,000 words, which is about the same length as three standard exegesis papers, or about a quarter-to-a-third of a master's thesis. I gave a copy to my adviser today to proof-read and to respond to. I told him I didn't expect him to grade it, and he laughed and thanked me for that!
The title of the paper is What does the Bible really say (and really NOT say) about speaking in tongues?
Here is a list of the paper's sections from the table of contents:
Introduction
Ecstatic utterance !?!?
So, if speaking in tongues is not ecstatic utterance, what is it?
What does speaking in tongues do?
What else does speaking in tongues do?
Do people have to speak in tongues when they receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?
Speaking about the Holy Spirit giving things, does the Bible really say that speaking in tongues is a gift?
What can we learn about speaking in tongues from I Corinthians 12, 13 and 14?
But wait! Doesn't the Bible say that speaking in tongues ended?
Wesleyan Holiness and speaking in tongues
Including speaking in tongues decently and in order in the life of the Church of God
Sources
Before I started writing the paper I did a brief survey of recent commentaries, just as I would if I were writing an exegesis paper. That's what convinced me that the most common obstacle to understanding what the Bible has to say about speaking in tongues is regarding it as ecstatic utterance, for which there is no biblical warrant.
The next-to-the-last section is about the Wesleyan Holiness movement and speaking in tongues for two reasons, the current faith community with which I am involved not only came out of the Wesleyan Holiness movement itself, William Seymour came out of the progenitor of this very same faith community. There are "camps" within this faith community regarding tongues, and part of the reason for that is Wesleyan imprecision regarding "works of grace."
The last section is "Including speaking in tongues decently and in order in the life of the Church of God." The first thing we have to do to heal the breaches within this faith community is to come to a common understanding of speaking in tongues, and the only way to do that is to find out EXACTLY what the Bible does and does not say, because the Bible is the thread of commonality in the congregations of this community. If we can reach agreement on what the Bible says, then we can reach agreement. That's what the ministry of reconciliation is. The second thing we have to do is figure out how to apply the FREEDOM the Bible gives regarding speaking in tongues while keeping it decent and in order.
Raf, I have always liked and respected and admired you, and I still do! I have to ask you though, how would you like it if you were working on a very complex and extended news story, and somebody else, who has no idea of what you are writing or why, came in and started making irrelevant arguments against what you are writing without even having read it? I ask you, please, to imagine yourself in that situation.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Steve, your post was going just fine until you inappropriately injected me into it at the end. This isn't hard. If you keep discussing me, I become the topic. So stop.
And I repeat what I have said all along: I will respect what you deem to be on topic, as long as it is on topic for everyone. I will avoid what is off topic, as long as it is off topic for everyone. "It's on topic for him but not for you" is rude. It just is.
So no problem. You want this thread to take for granted that SIT is real. Dandy. I won't question it. But if someone else questions it and you, instead of explaining that they're off topic, engage that discussion, then YOU are declaring their questions to be on topic.
You can't have it both ways. Challenging modern SIT is either on topic for everyone or it's off topic for everyone. I point you back to the "Staying on Topic" thread pinned to the top of doctrinal. You may not exclude someone from an on topic conversation because you disagree with his presuppositions (especially in this case, where I reject the notion that my presuppositions play any role in this: at least one poster on GSC remains a committed Christian but agrees with me on modern SIT not being biblical SIT. I AGREE that this is a separate conversation. But when you engage it, you expand the thread topic).
All I ask of you is a little consistency.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Below is information on speaking in tongues from one of the biblical articles that I have written. Here is a link to the web site with this biblical article, which is the equivalent of a clearly written biblical commentary.
1 Corinthians Chapter 14
The biblical usage of speaking in tongues over the years has been very controversial among Christians and especially in various churches. Plenty of Christians do not understand what speaking in tongues is nor do they believe in it. Others believe in it, but sometimes do not speak in tongues at churches without a great deal of confusion. With this in mind we are going to do a short study of speaking in tongues purely from New Testament scriptures.
First of all biblically the Greek word for “tongues” here in 14:2 is the Greek word “gloossa.” From the Thayer’s Greek to English lexicon it means literally the tongue as a member of our physical body, which is the organ of speech. Tongues (gloossa) can also represent a language used by a particular people in distinction from that of other nations. To see this let’s look at scriptures, which use this Greek word.
Mark 7:32-35
32 Then they brought to Him (Jesus) one who was deaf and had an impediment in his speech, and they begged Him to put His hand on him. 33 And He (Jesus) took him aside from the multitude, and put His fingers in his ears, and He (Jesus) spat and touched his tongue (gloossa). 34 Then, looking up to heaven, He sighed, and said to him, "Ephphatha," that is, "Be opened." 35 Immediately his ears were opened, and the impediment of his tongue (gloossa) was loosed, and he spoke plainly.
New Kings James Version
Above we see clearly the usage of the word tongue (gloossa) as a body part used for speech. This should clearly tell us that tongues as inspired by the Holy Spirit can include our actual tongue body part with the speaker in control of his own. Next we will look at usages of tongues (gloossa) used for speech as inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:3-4
3 And there appeared unto them cloven (diamerizoo) tongues (gloossa) like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues (gloossa), as the Spirit gave them utterance.
King James Version
Holy Ghost above from the King James Version is the same as Holy Spirit in other versions. In Acts 2 we have for the first time the Holy Spirit, which Jesus promised to give to his followers. Here we see the Holy Spirit coming to Jesus’ twelve disciples looking like divided tongues of fire and sitting on each of them. The Greek word used for “cloven” is “diamerizoo.” “Diamerizoo” is normally translated divided and means to divide or cut in pieces. From this we see a vision or a painted picture spiritually of what occurs with the receiving of the Holy Spirit. We see the Holy Spirit being individually given, but we see every individual gift of Holy Spirit interconnected. In the vision it starts off as one tongue of fire, but then is divided separately among recipients. This is harmonious with Ephesians 2:18 which states “we have access to the Father by one Spirit”, and Ephesians 4:4 which states “There is one body and one Spirit…”
With this they were each filled with the Holy Spirit and the first thing they did was speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance or as the Spirit enabled them. This was prophesied during Jesus’ earthly ministry for example, Matthew 3:11 quotes John the Baptist, “He (Jesus) will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”
It is interesting that at this time we had a festival known as Pentecost or the feast of harvest. According to Acts 2:5, we had Jews in Jerusalem at this festival from every nation with multiple languages spoken and understood. What was noticed by these people from other nations was that there were 12 Galileans speaking foreign languages, many of which they could not have known. People from Galilee were not known for their linguistic ability or knowledge. Some of these listed nations with languages are as follows:
Acts 2:8-11
8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians…
King James Version
Then continuing in verse 11, “we do hear them speak in our tongues (gloossa) the wonderful works of God.” Or stated with more detail, these people of many nations heard the disciples of Jesus Christ speak of the magnificent, excellent, splendid, and wonderful works or things done by God. And this was spoken in a language that the speakers themselves did not know and therefore did not understand. Yet it was all done with their own vocal ability. Next, we see that tongues is also words that “magnify God.”
Acts 10:44-46
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God...
New King James Version
Here we see for the first time Gentiles also receiving the gift of Holy Spirit. Gentiles is a term used by Jewish people to refer to foreigners, or any other people who were not part of the Jewish race. And like the twelve original disciples, who were also Jesus’ apostles, the first thing the Gentiles did after receiving the Holy Spirit was speak in tongues and with this magnify God. Magnifying God is declaring or deeming as great or to esteem highly, to extol, to laud, to celebrate God’s greatness.
To summarize from the scriptures we have covered including 1 Corinthians 13:1, the chapter before this and now 1 Corinthians 14:2 we see that tongues or speaking in tongues is the following:
1.From Mark 7:33-35, the physical human tongue as used for speech.
2.From Acts 2:4, speaking inspired words from the Holy Spirit.
3.From Acts 2:11, speaking the wonderful works of God.
4.From Acts 10:46, speaking words that magnify God or declare that God is great.
5.From 1 Corinthians 13:1, which also uses the word “gloossa,” speaking a language either of men or angels.
6.From 1 Corinthians 14:2, speaking mysteries or divine secrets directly to God and not man.
As we saw in Acts 2, sometimes people can understand what is being spoken in tongues, but this is rare and could be considered miraculous. Speaking in tongues is speaking to God a hidden or secret thing as inspired by the Holy Spirit. The fact that these people of different nations heard the 12 apostles speak in their own native individual languages is phenomenon, and a reverse effect of that which occurred at the Tower of Babel when God confounded the languages. See Genesis chapter 11, verses 1-9. That everyone understood in their own different language in Acts chapter 2 does not normally happen, but apparently this phenomenon was a sign of the importance and significance of the receiving of the Holy Spirit as promised by God. If someone speaks in tongues or speaks in tongues with interpretation, it is possible for someone to know the language or tongue if it is a language of men that they know. However, the person speaking in tongues according to the scriptures will not know the language otherwise it wouldn’t be a tongue also described as a mystery or divine secret to the speaker.
1 Corinthians 14:3-5
3 But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification.
New Kings James Version
Here we see plainly the difference between speaking words of prophecy and speaking in tongues. Both are a manifestation or evidence of the Spirit of God given to followers of Jesus Christ (see 1 Corinthians 12:7-11). Words of prophecy are preferred in a church gathering because they are words spoken in the language of those people present. In contrast, speaking in tongues is not a preferred manifestation when spoken aloud in a church gathering unless the person that speaks in tongues interprets in the language of the people present the words that he has just spoken in tongues. This is referred to in 1 Corinthians 12:10 as the interpretation of tongues. Both are the work of the one and same Spirit of God, which has been given to individual followers of Jesus Christ. Remember Acts 2 and the vision of cloven tongues like as of fire, which came as a mass and then separated right before resting on individual disciples of Jesus Christ. This was a vision of the one Spirit, Ephesians 4:4. Just as we have one body with all followers of Jesus Christ a member, we have one Spirit, with all followers of Jesus Christ getting a portion, also called the gift of “Holy Spirit.” And the giver of this gift is God, the Father through His Son Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 2:5
5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
New International Version
Both prophecy and tongues are for edification. Speaking in tongues is for individual edification, which should be primarily spoken quietly to oneself and not spoken aloud in an assembly of believers unless the speaker offers words of interpretation. Later we will see that speaking in tongues is a form of prayer and is specifically called in 1 Corinthians 14:14-15, praying in the spirit. Paul wants everyone to speak in tongues in this manor according to verse 5. In contrast, in a church gathering, prophecy is of greater importance and should be done because it brings edification, exhortation and comfort to the people present. These are three related words as stated in verse 3. Stated in a similar way prophecy brings to the church a building up along with encouragement and comfort.
1 Corinthians 14:6-11
6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking with tongues (gloossa), what shall I profit you unless I speak to you either by revelation, by knowledge, by prophesying, or by teaching? 7 Even things without life, whether flute or harp, when they make a sound, unless they make a distinction in the sounds, how will it be known what is piped or played? 8 For if the trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will prepare himself for battle? 9 So likewise you, unless you utter by the tongue (gloossa) words easy to understand, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and none of them is without significance. 11 Therefore, if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to him who speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me.
New Kings James Version.
Speaking in tongues is an important manifestation for followers of Jesus Christ. Personally, I have used it as spiritual prayer for a number of years now. I have also instructed others in this spiritual prayer and then led them also into speaking in tongues. See an example of this in Acts 19:6. However, as the previous section of scripture clearly states, if we speak in tongues out loud, words that no one understands, how will it benefit the listener? The answer is obvious. Unless we speak words that are understood, one can or would merely sound like a foreigner. If we speak in tongues out loud without the addition of words in our common language, for example revelation, prophesying or teaching, how shall it assist or be useful or advantageous to the listener? The answer is, it will not. It will only edify the speaker. How is that being of service to our fellow brothers and sister in Christ? Isn’t that why we as followers of Jesus Christ meet and get together, to serve and help one another?
1 Corinthians 14:12-14
12 Even so you, since you are zealous for spiritual gifts (The word gifts was added. A better translation would be spiritual matters or things.), let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel. 13 Therefore let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful.
New Kings James Version.
Stated again, if we are zealous for spiritual matters or things, let’s focus that zeal on serving our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. And when it comes to speaking words in a church service let’s speak words to edify or build up the church. Therefore, anyone who speaks in a tongue in a regular church service should first pray that he may interpret. Then and only then should we speak in tongues and then we should follow this with the interpretation, in the language of the people present. We are able to speak in tongues and then immediately follow this with the interpretation of the tongue that we just spoke, through the power and ability of the Holy Spirit and through faith in God and prayer. Yes, prayer needs to be mixed with faith in God. So again, before we speak in tongues out loud in front of everyone at a church gathering. Let’s first pray and have faith that we will interpret the divine secrets and wonderful works of God given to us. Speaking in tongues is spiritual prayer and I do it and I like it, but in a church gathering let’s primarily speak fruitful words with our understanding.
1 Corinthians 14:15-16
15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
New International Version
Here the scriptures ask a fundamental question based on all the previous truthful and practical knowledge. “What shall I do?” The answer is to both pray in the spirit, which is speaking in tongues, and pray with our understanding. And when we speak in tongues, if we want, we can also do it to the tune of our favorite musician, musical group or melody. And of course, in a church service we can all also sing one of our favorite hymnals together in the language of the people present. Three of my all time favorites are “I’ve Found a Friend in Jesus, He’s Everything To Me”, “What a Friend We Have in Jesus” and “How great thou art.”
1 Corinthians 14:16-17
16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how can any one in the position of an outsider say the "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17 For you may give thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.
Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright 1952 (2nd edition, 1971) by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Another obvious question with a simple answer. We may be giving thanks spiritually through speaking in tongues, but if no one listening to us knows what we are saying, then no one, but the speaker is edified. If that is the case we may as well just stay home and pray in our closet with the door shut (see Matthew 6:6). Therefore as this section of scripture has said and implied a number of times. If we speak in tongues without interpretation we should primarily do it silently to God in prayer and praise. The main point in this as we shall see is to not bring confusion to members of the body of Christ.
1 Corinthians 14:18-19
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
King James Version
A great summary written by Paul. Paul thanks God that he speaks in tongues, at this time, perhaps more than all the people of the church in Corinth. Nevertheless, in church Paul would rather speak out loud five words that will teach and edify others than ten thousand words in a tongue (gloossa) that is not known by the people that are present and listening to him.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Steve Lortz, I am glad that you are teaching people at the Anderson University School of Theology even though you are also a student there. Being both a student and a teacher is a good thing. We need to learn before we teach. And certainly you are much more knowledgeable regarding speaking in tongues as spiritual prayer and thanksgiving than other people there. With my judgement you get an "A".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Thank you, Mark!
waysider - The only difference between free vocalization and speaking in tongues is this: when a person is speaking in tongues, the Spirit gives the utterance (or "ability" as per the NRSV).
How can we know that the Spirit is giving the utterance? We can't from speaking in tongues itself, because no person speaking in tongues understands what she or he is saying. Our confidence that the Spirit gives utterance has to come from our experience of prophecy. Not TWI prophecy, what Wierwille taught was hogwash, but rather from the biblical prophecy described by Paul in I Corinthians 14:22-25. If our experience of prophecy actually has the reputed or apparent qualities or character Paul described, then we can judge that our experience was genuine. That is what is at the heart of I Corinthians 14:22-25
22Tongues, then, are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers."
This could be accurately translated as "Therefore tongues serve as a sign not to the speakers (in tongues) who are confident/convinced, but to the speakers (in tongues) who lack confidence/are not convinced, and prophecy serves as a sign not for the speakers (of prophecy) who lack confidence/are not convinced, but for the speakers (of prophecy) who are confident/convinced."
How does biblical prophecy do that?
When a person who is uninstructed or unconvinced hears someone speak something that goes straight to her or his heart, speaking directly to the hidden issues and questions that reside there, and that person spontaneously says something like, "Whoa! God must have had you say that!" then the somebody who did the speaking can conclude that the Spirit did indeed give the utterance for those words. When I know for sure from my own experience that the Spirit of God can and does give the utterance when I prophesy, then it is reasonable for me to conclude that the Spirit also gives the utterance when I speak in tongues.
Next time, what exactly is going on when a person speaks by the Spirit of God...
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
So Mark, Steve, are you guys agreed that Biblical speaking in tongues will produce an actual language every time?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Yes, Paul and Acts chapter 2 does say or indicate that it is a language. A person that I know who NEVER was involved with TWI asked me about SIT. I explained it to him. Then he asked me to speak in tongues for him to be able to listen to it. I normally just SIT for my private prayers silently as Paul says to do. However, I did his request. After I finished he then told me it sounded to him like an actual language. Was I then suppose to disagree with him? He simply told me in English that it sounded like a language to him. Yes, a language that he did not know as I did not follow it with the interpretation. We were together with family members and were speaking quietly to each other.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
MRAP
Hey Raf and Kermitt (Waysider, don't mind if I call you Kermitt - any parts of you smell like pork) All aside, here's my question: I have been speaking in tongues since 1972 (what's that, 40 some years) and my tonuge/s change quite frequently and have done so over the years and decades. I SIT alot, often outloud when alone, sometimes just at the lips and more often, prior to making it that far. I do "hear" the words in the ol'e noggin (no, not hearing voices). So,if the Bible says that it is a manifesttion than is it real? Now, I do remember all about those "starter words" and that is a mind thing; I recall how many folks started their tongues the same way that VP did (la shanta). I spoke in tongues prior to completing the PFAL class; that's another story. So, do either of you still SIT, I think I know that answer, in part. I have not read this whole thread but just needed to ask, maybe had I read the whole thing I would have gotten my answer. Raf, you sorry you ever gave me access? My goal is purely personal, saying that makes me think myself self-centered since I have nothing to add but only take - yes, I am then. Can you suggest anything that I can give to help.
Edited by Modgellan(removed inappropriately placed comment)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
MRAP, your question is not appropriate for this particular thread (which is not supposed to be arguing about whether SIT is real).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No, not sorry I gave you access. You're arriving here way past this site's heyday.
Your views are welcome, but be advised that the forum is open to all views, including those who do not consider the Bible to be The Word anymore.
There is a subsection of the Doctrinal forum called Questioning Faith. In it, there is a thread on Questioning SIT. Your question belongs there.
Edited by Modgellanremoved reference to someone else's inappropriate question.inappropriate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Some people may or may not believe that SIT is from God and is a language. However, everyone should at least see that over the years people have developed thousands of languages. The many languages have often been for communication, but also some languages developed by people have had other goals and results. For example, the languages used so that this and other web sites exist. These languages are PHP, which I have studied and completed two 16 week college classes in studying. This language used for this web site is used with other languages, HTML, CSS and JavaScript. If mankind can develop many languages, then if God does exist as the creator of mankind, God would be able to develop many languages also. The goal for the languages of SIT are prayer and praise to God and direct and personal communication with God.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Genuine languages all have a definable structure, a syntax. That's what sets them apart from mumbo-jumbo. The speaking in tongues we experienced in The Way did not have such a structure. What does that tell you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
This is a false statement of judgment on your part only and nothing more. Are you the one only that should analyze whether or not someone is actually SIT as a language that God has actually inspired or provided to an individual? You are only responsible for applying what you want to apply and not what other people want to apply. As an example, 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that Paul did SIT, while other people either did not or applied it much less than he did. Can you at least read that Paul did SIT? If you can not see or read this then it is because you don't want to.
Also what you are saying now disagrees with someone that I spoke in tongues to for him to actually listen to recently. He told me it sounded to him like a language. However, today when we hear other people speak foreign languages that we don't understand, we often don't see or understand the structure of this human language. This could require actually being able to speak and understand the language spoken, which does not happen with SIT. This is only a language to God for prayer and praise.
Also this is the part of the forum for actual scriptural analysis. You would be agreed to more in the other part of this web site.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I actually agree with Mark there. We're talking about what the Bible says, not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's not a judgement, Mark, it's an observation. A trained linguist can discern whether something is or is not a structured language without knowing what language it is or the content thereof. As far as I know, there has never been a documented case of a trained linguist identifying speaking in tongues (modern variety) as a genuine language. If you know of one, I will gladly retract my skepticism.
edit: This does relate to Biblical references because on The Day of Pentecost, there were people who did understand the language being spoken, even without formal linguistic training.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Mark has already said that Biblical SIT produces languages. I agree with him. Steve clearly intended for this thread not to question the validity of modern claims of SIT. I would love to honor that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Also SIT biblically unless interpreted in the language of the people present to hear it is only for ones private prayer and praise to God. Unless there is the interpretation in the language of the people present to hear, this should be done silently to God as a form of prayer. And this is one of the main scriptural points of Paul's 1 Corinthians chapter 14.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
And here is some information from the opening paragraph of an article that I have written that relates to the above. Here is a link to the article, Age and the Greek Words.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Mark, I think you misunderstood me. I wrote: "I actually agree with Mark there. We're talking about what the Bible says, not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced it."
You apparently thought I meant "not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced what the Bible says." Your post makes sense if that was your understanding of my comment.
But what I intended to convey was, "not anyone's unsubstantiated claims to have reproduced the practice of speaking in tongues as described in the Bible."
I was agreeing with you (at least, I think I was) that questioning your practice of SIT, indeed questioning ANYone's practice of SIT, is off-topic on this thread.
It is on topic for me to ask you whether you believe Biblical SIT produces a language. It is off-topic for me to challenge YOUR practice of SIT. You say you do it. That's fine. In doing so, you are saying that you produce a language when you SIT. (That is a logical extension: "The Bible says SIT produces a language. My practice of SIT is consistent with the Bible. Therefore, when I SIT, I'm producing a language.") If anyone wants to challenge that assertion, this thread by design is not the place to do it.
My point is, I wasn't trying to comment on the accuracy of the modern translations of the Bible. I was merely agreeing with you concerning drawing the on-topic/off-topic line.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Yes, Raf, I know you were not disagreeing with my posts here. And by me posting historical information hopefully not disagreeing with your posts. Merely, I was giving actual historical information regarding the translation of texts from different languages, for example Koine Greek in order to publish the King James Version of the bible, which is for the English language. Obviously, at least to me this relates to what the bible says, the historical information on how it was first published. Here is a link to more detailed information on this.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/kjvhist.html
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.