-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Bapticostal Questions
- Thread starter Phillip
- Start date
M
mickd7
Guest
BillyG: The answer is as Ben stated . Paul said he spoke the language of angels!
M
mickd7
Guest
1 Cor 14:1 answers that question about not understanding the unknown tongues. If we pray to God in the spirit we do not understand always what we say but sometimes God will give us the intepretation. Now in the church when the Gift of tongues is used there will be a interpretation.
1 Corinthians 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
1 Corinthians 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
The statements are conditional and conjectural. Paul never said he spoke in the tongues of angels, which indeed he didn't. And Paul didn't give his body to be burned, which of course, he never did. Paul was martyred by the hand of Nero.
In order for the first statement to be true, all the other statements have to be true. Since we know that Paul never gave his body to burned that consequently makes all the other statement just as conditional. The fact is that he never spoke in the tongues of angels. In fact if you study out what the tongues of angels are you would realize that it would be impossible for man to speak in the tongues of angels, just as it would be for him to have all faith, and all knowledge. Paul was not omniscient. He was not God, and never claimed to be. The statements were conditional. He was saying that even if these things were possible for him to obtain, and he still didn't have love, they would be useless to him.
DHK
1 Corinthians 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
The statements are conditional and conjectural. Paul never said he spoke in the tongues of angels, which indeed he didn't. And Paul didn't give his body to be burned, which of course, he never did. Paul was martyred by the hand of Nero.
In order for the first statement to be true, all the other statements have to be true. Since we know that Paul never gave his body to burned that consequently makes all the other statement just as conditional. The fact is that he never spoke in the tongues of angels. In fact if you study out what the tongues of angels are you would realize that it would be impossible for man to speak in the tongues of angels, just as it would be for him to have all faith, and all knowledge. Paul was not omniscient. He was not God, and never claimed to be. The statements were conditional. He was saying that even if these things were possible for him to obtain, and he still didn't have love, they would be useless to him.
DHK
Maybe the HCSB helps clarify it also.
1 Corinthians 13:
1. If I speak the languages of men and of angels, but do not have love, I am a sounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2. If I have (the gift of) prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so that I can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
3 And if I donate all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4. Love is patient; love is kind. Love does not envy; is not boastful; is not conceited;
etc.
Interesting how a Pentecostal can take that first sentence out of context and assume they can talk in the language of angels. . .
Maybe some of them can move mountains, too. THAT I would like to see.
1 Corinthians 13:
1. If I speak the languages of men and of angels, but do not have love, I am a sounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2. If I have (the gift of) prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so that I can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
3 And if I donate all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4. Love is patient; love is kind. Love does not envy; is not boastful; is not conceited;
etc.
Interesting how a Pentecostal can take that first sentence out of context and assume they can talk in the language of angels. . .
Maybe some of them can move mountains, too. THAT I would like to see.
Paul states openly that he speaks in the Tongues of Angels. You can believe it or not. It is in no way "Conditional" on anything else.
Paul did not say "If". Paul says "Though I speak".
Paul said that he gives his body to be burned and yes that did not happen, yet he was still prepared to be martyred at that point, the way in which it happened was not up to him. Yet it does not change Scripture which states that Paul spoke in the toungues of Angels.
Paul did not say "If". Paul says "Though I speak".
Paul said that he gives his body to be burned and yes that did not happen, yet he was still prepared to be martyred at that point, the way in which it happened was not up to him. Yet it does not change Scripture which states that Paul spoke in the toungues of Angels.
Plain ol' Ralph
New Member
It is ALSO against the rules of the Baptist ONLY debate forums, uh, for Baptists ONLY?
But it does still amaze me how the (so-called) Bapticostals/Charismatics, dance all around the "tongues" subject but yet never look at Acts 2 very closely, either.
Anytime the Holy Ghost gave the gift of tongues, it was heard by everyone present, understood by everyone present, and the Holy Ghost did the interpreting, and that w/o any human assitence!
Anytime we see where "tongues" are mentioned, in regards to there needing to be an interpretor, it is expressly, and ONLY the subject of languages of men, else hopw the mention of tongues of angels? Well? Did Paul have an interpretor to teach him these tongues? And just what did he say? Uh, wouldn't that be in direct conflict with what the Charismatics say about tongues altogether? YES.
But it does still amaze me how the (so-called) Bapticostals/Charismatics, dance all around the "tongues" subject but yet never look at Acts 2 very closely, either.
Anytime the Holy Ghost gave the gift of tongues, it was heard by everyone present, understood by everyone present, and the Holy Ghost did the interpreting, and that w/o any human assitence!
Anytime we see where "tongues" are mentioned, in regards to there needing to be an interpretor, it is expressly, and ONLY the subject of languages of men, else hopw the mention of tongues of angels? Well? Did Paul have an interpretor to teach him these tongues? And just what did he say? Uh, wouldn't that be in direct conflict with what the Charismatics say about tongues altogether? YES.
Then you must be King James Only too, huh?
Wow, talk about taking scripture out of context--read the whole chapter.
What a weak doctrine based on this verse and this chapter. Are you SURE you have read the entire chapter "in context".
1Co 13:1
(ALT) If I speak with the tongues of people and of angels, but I do not have love, I have become [as] brass sounding or a cymbal tinkling.
(ASV) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
(CEV) What if I could speak all languages of humans and of angels? If I did not love others, I would be nothing more than a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
(Darby) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.
(DRB) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
(EMTV) Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become as sounding brass or a clashing cymbal.
(ESV) If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
(GB) Though I speake with the tongues of men and Angels, and haue not loue, I am as sounding brasse, or a tinkling cymbal.
(GNT) ᾿Εὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων, ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω, γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον.
(KJV+) Though1437 I speak2980 with the3588 tongues1100 of men444 and2532 of angels,32 and1161 have2192 not3361 charity,26 I am become1096 as sounding2278 brass,5475 or2228 a tinkling214 cymbal.2950
(KJVA) Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
(UPDV) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but don't have love, I have become sounding bronze, or a clanging cymbal.
1 Cor. 14:16-19, "Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified. I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue".
In 1 Cor. 13:1 it is "If . . ."
In 1 Cor. 13:1 it is "If . . ."
Although I do not like the AV rendering as well as a newer translation, for the sake of posting (since it is the only thing I have installed on this computer that I can clip and paste), I will use it.
Read this carefully, then read my next post.
1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
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.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
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.
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?
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?
8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
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.
10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15 ¶ What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
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.
20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21 ¶ In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Read this carefully, then read my next post.
1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
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.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
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.
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?
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?
8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
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.
10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15 ¶ What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
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.
20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21 ¶ In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Follow me here carefully:
Notice two key issues. The translation is not just "tongue", but "unknown tongue".
Now, take the fact that "tongue" is synomymous with "language". Therefore, we have "unknown language".
This fits perfectly with Acts. Notice carefully that "Tongues" are a sign, not for them that believe, but to them that believeth not.
Now, let me ask a question. Why would an "unknown tongue" be a sign to a non-believer, if it was gibberish to him?
It would be a sign if the speaker spoke in his native language and a foreigner could understand it in his/her own language. EXACTLY AS IN ACTS.
Notice also that he mentions that speaking in an "unknown tongue" or "unknown language" in the church doesn't do anything but edify the person speaking. Why? Nobody can understand him. He may be speaking in Hebrew, while the listeners only speak Greek.
Now, let's continue with the logic. The only place that I know of that the language of Angel's is the scripture we have been quoting in 1 Cor. 13. Paul is making a remark about speaking in different languages of men or even language of angel's. Maybe Paul COULD talk to an Angle in the angel's own tongue. Does this do the church any good? Aboslutely not.
It is also thought that prophecying in this context is not the "Old Testament style -- or even Revelation's style" of telling the future; but more of a "teaching", or sharing of a knowledgeable person with the members of the church. This isn't the threads subject, so I will say no more about that.
Again, the bottom line, Paul is trying to politely CORRECT the church that has drifted off of the straight and narrow path and is abusing "gifts" and has many problems which Paul discusses throughout the letters.
Why would someone wish to build a major doctrine that is such a central focus in their church worship on a miracle that happened in Acts and was corrected and STRICTLY defined in letters to a wayward church. Paul put it this way--if you are going to do it, then here are the restrictions.
To make this such a major doctrine seems quite odd.
Notice two key issues. The translation is not just "tongue", but "unknown tongue".
Now, take the fact that "tongue" is synomymous with "language". Therefore, we have "unknown language".
This fits perfectly with Acts. Notice carefully that "Tongues" are a sign, not for them that believe, but to them that believeth not.
Now, let me ask a question. Why would an "unknown tongue" be a sign to a non-believer, if it was gibberish to him?
It would be a sign if the speaker spoke in his native language and a foreigner could understand it in his/her own language. EXACTLY AS IN ACTS.
Notice also that he mentions that speaking in an "unknown tongue" or "unknown language" in the church doesn't do anything but edify the person speaking. Why? Nobody can understand him. He may be speaking in Hebrew, while the listeners only speak Greek.
Now, let's continue with the logic. The only place that I know of that the language of Angel's is the scripture we have been quoting in 1 Cor. 13. Paul is making a remark about speaking in different languages of men or even language of angel's. Maybe Paul COULD talk to an Angle in the angel's own tongue. Does this do the church any good? Aboslutely not.
It is also thought that prophecying in this context is not the "Old Testament style -- or even Revelation's style" of telling the future; but more of a "teaching", or sharing of a knowledgeable person with the members of the church. This isn't the threads subject, so I will say no more about that.
Again, the bottom line, Paul is trying to politely CORRECT the church that has drifted off of the straight and narrow path and is abusing "gifts" and has many problems which Paul discusses throughout the letters.
Why would someone wish to build a major doctrine that is such a central focus in their church worship on a miracle that happened in Acts and was corrected and STRICTLY defined in letters to a wayward church. Paul put it this way--if you are going to do it, then here are the restrictions.
To make this such a major doctrine seems quite odd.