Some have wrongly thought that the Bible has nothing to say concerning the modern day version of tongues being propagated within todays charismatic and pentecostal churches. The problem comes in not taking Paul's statements concerning the unknown tongue at face value. These statements can be found in 1 Cor. 14. First, Paul tells us that no man understands it (this of course was not true concerning the real gift as found in Acts). He then uses musical instraments to illustrate this very point by showing that a bugler blowing out uncertain sounds will only confuse the troops. He also tells us that notes played without distinction cannot produce a song that is known to the listeners. Paul will often use the word for languge in it's singular form in this chapter because there is no such thing as different languages or dialects of gibberish(gibberishes) non language cannot be classified in anything other than one form. To try and understand 1 Cor. 14 without knowing that Paul is refrencing the same kind of gibberish that "tongues" speakers speak today is impossible. His commands for its proper use would only destroy and expose its main proponent.
-
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!
Why "tongues" means gibberish
- Thread starter Stpaul
- Start date
Act 2:3 And tongues, like flames of fire that were divided, appeared to them and rested on each one of them.
Act 2:4 Then they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different languages , as the Spirit gave them ability for speech.
Act 2:5 There were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 When this sound occurred, the multitude came together and was confused because each one heard them speaking in his own language.
Tongues were REAL languages, not gibberish!
1Co 14:2 For the person who speaks in another language is not speaking to men but to God, since no one understands him; however, he speaks mysteries in the Spirit.
Notice this is written by Paul to the church at Corinth. The "no one understands" means the language spoken was different than spoken there...not that "no one" can understand what was spoken.
Act 2:4 Then they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different languages , as the Spirit gave them ability for speech.
Act 2:5 There were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 When this sound occurred, the multitude came together and was confused because each one heard them speaking in his own language.
Tongues were REAL languages, not gibberish!
What do you mean by the "real gift"?!? Are you admitting that today's tongues are not a real gift (as are heard in the pentecostal churches)? If you do, I agree.
1Co 14:2 For the person who speaks in another language is not speaking to men but to God, since no one understands him; however, he speaks mysteries in the Spirit.
Notice this is written by Paul to the church at Corinth. The "no one understands" means the language spoken was different than spoken there...not that "no one" can understand what was spoken.
The "tongues" of Corinth had nothing in common with the real gift as recorded in Acts 2,8,10 and 19. They were exactally the very same thing you would experiance in "tongues" chruches today-gibberish,that which no man can understand. Btw show me how verse 2 of 1 Cor.14 works wonderfully with the context of Acts 2. The truth is you can't. No one can. And that is because what Paul was writting about had nothing to do with the real gift of languages that were always understood,without an interpretor I might add, by the people to whom they were spoken. Notice God or "a god" was never addressed when anyone spoke with the gift of tongues nor was the message given in tongues "mysteriies". The unknown tongue of Corinth was gibberish and Paul knew it better than anyone else. You start thinking that way the passage will come alive and guess what you wont even have to become a charismatic.
Ray Berrian
New Member
Look up the word in the Greek and see if the English word, 'tongue' comes from the word phonetically sounded, 'gibberish' or 'glossa.' You will find it used various times in I Corinthians chapter 14 and also in chapter 12.
That is why theologians speak of Glossalia the words offered to the Lord in 'tongues' rather than in the sarcastic word, gibberish. This term slanders the Lord God and his Word.
That is why theologians speak of Glossalia the words offered to the Lord in 'tongues' rather than in the sarcastic word, gibberish. This term slanders the Lord God and his Word.
The gift of tongues was never God talking to God through human vocal cords. The true gift was human beings speaking words to other human beings who understood them. Words the speakers had no prior knowledge of but the listener knew. A good way to illustrate this is found in numbers 22 where Balaam's donkey speaks to Balaam. Even though the donkey was not a human the situation can be used to show how the gift of tongues worked in Acts. The unknown tongue of Corinth was a sorcerors version of tongues that was used by him and his followers to edify themselves in the eyes of other people that they might build a greater following. This version of "tongues" was just as hokey as todays version is.
Ray Berrian
New Member
[Quote} Beginners should study the English and try to get the basic understanding of I Corinthians 14:2. The glossalia experienced by the Christians here was that person speaking to the Lord God in a non-nationalistic langugage only know to God. This is why Paul says, '. . . no man or woman understands this person speaking in 'tongues.' It always appears as a 'mystery' to those who might try to make sentences out of this 'glossalia.'
When this happened in the Corinthian Church and in churches today we are always to wait for the 'interpretation of tongues' [14:13,26,27,].
Notice, Paul does not say that tongues are ceasing, but instead says 'the things I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. In other words, these are the commands to the church from the Lord Himself. [/Quote].
When this happened in the Corinthian Church and in churches today we are always to wait for the 'interpretation of tongues' [14:13,26,27,].
Notice, Paul does not say that tongues are ceasing, but instead says 'the things I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. In other words, these are the commands to the church from the Lord Himself. [/Quote].
tamborine lady
Active Member
1st Cor 14-38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
If Paul was comdemning the whole thing, why didn't he tell them to stop tongues altogether?
Instead, he says forbid not to speak with tongues. Hmmm-----
Selah,
Tam
Ray Berrian
New Member
Tam,
Better yet, the Apostle Paul who wrote most of the N.T. said, 'I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than you all.' [14:18].
I am sure you heard this before. Someone said that Paul was a southerner because he said, 'I speak with tongues more than yu--all.'
Paul was praying in tongues to the Lord God. [14:2].
Better yet, the Apostle Paul who wrote most of the N.T. said, 'I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than you all.' [14:18].
I am sure you heard this before. Someone said that Paul was a southerner because he said, 'I speak with tongues more than yu--all.'
Paul was praying in tongues to the Lord God. [14:2].