bro Dohzman
dohzman wrote:Something else that seems to escape people is that tongues doesn't nessarily need to be human language >>> 1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels >>>. :-) Just to re-state your comment above with the reference and set it alone, just incase someone needs that reference. God Bless
_________________Farai Bamu
I can see the possibility of 2 scenarios, 1) all of those present spoke in tongues, there could have been many different tongues (languages) at once since they were all filled and speaking in tongues. 2) I 've observed that God for His own reasons doesn't always tie things up for us nicely, as we would like. Leaving some things for a mystery or even a miracle, this could be one of those times.You do have me curious though, how do you see that passage in Acts2?
_________________D.Miller
Isaiah 28:9-13 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.These particular Isaiah scriptures cannot be used to make an argument for speaking in unknown tongues, only the tongues (Languages) spoken at Pentecost. Isa 28:11For - This verse is to be understood as a response to what the complaining and dissatisfied people had said, as expressed in the previous verses. God says that he will teach them, but it should be by another tongue - a foreign language in a distant land. Since they refused to hearken to the messages which he sent to them, and which they regarded as adapted only to children, he would teach them in a manner that should be "much more" humiliating because of their lack of understanding of their own prophets, Quote: Isaiah 28:7-8 "But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment. For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean. He would make use of the barbarous language of foreigners to bring them to the true knowledge of God.This is the same thing that happened a Pentecost, for what did they say? Acts 2:6-8 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?The same adaptation of language but different outcomes. In Isaiah They were spoken to by foreign languages that they could not understand and hear the truth of God through them. In Acts The truth of God given to Galileans, and the Jews, (Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.) understanding in each's own language. One earthly adaptation of language and the other heavenly adaptation of language, and both to bring the Truth of God to man, one as scorn of Israel the other, the blessing of Jesus Christ and the filling of The Holy Spirit.Isaiah:With stammering lips - The word which is used here is derived from a verb ( לעג laag ), which means to speak unintelligibly: especially to speak in a foreign language, or to stammer; and then to mock, deride, laugh at, scorn (compare Isa 33:19; Pr 1:26; 17:5; Ps 2:4; 59:9; Job 22:19). Here it means in a foreign or barbarous tongue; and the sense is, that the lessons which God wished to teach would be conveyed to them through the language of foreigners - the Chaldeans. They should be removed to a distant land, and there, in hearing a strange speech, in living long among foreigners, they should learn the lesson which they refused to do when addressed by the prophets in their own land.Chaldeans to teach Jews? Not good. Scorn. Galileans to teach Jews? Especially in their own language? Wow! "No Prophet comes out of Galilee" Jhn 7:1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him. Jhn 7:9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode [still] in Galilee. Jhn 7:41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Jhn 7:52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.This is the reason the great men of Jewry of all nations were addressed by Galileans. Even as a scorn unto them.If as someone had said before on this thread, if tongues had of been written language, instead of tongues there would not be such an uproar over the gift of languages. One for self indulgence, the other for the Gift of God by the Holy Spirit Teaching us This Christ that is in us, and we will hear Him. Acts 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. In Christ: Phillip
_________________Phillip
Isaiah:With stammering lips - The word which is used here is derived from a verb ( לעג laag ), which means to speak unintelligibly: especially to speak in a foreign language, or to stammer; and then to mock, deride, laugh at, scorn (compare Isa 33:19; Pr 1:26; 17:5; Ps 2:4; 59:9; Job 22:19). Here it means in a foreign or barbarous tongue; and the sense is, that the lessons which God wished to teach would be conveyed to them through the language of foreigners - the Chaldeans. They should be removed to a distant land, and there, in hearing a strange speech, in living long among foreigners, they should learn the lesson which they refused to do when addressed by the prophets in their own land.
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. 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.(1Cor 14:21-22 KJVS)
And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,(Acts 10:45-46 KJVS)
_________________Ron Bailey
Hi philologos, you said:
that the disciples all spoke in Language A but that the hearers heard Language B,C,D,E,F,G, etc.
If I am understanding you aright I don't think that is what the passage is intending to convey.It may well have been that for some reason God allowed the German friend to 'interpret' the tongue utterance but we cannot use this as a model and I doubt very much that she would have called what she 'heard' her 'own language'.
To refer to 'Language A' as if all the disciples would be speaking in the same 'tongue' (that is, the spiritual gift of tongues) and as if you really mean to imply this is what you think the scripture means - that 120 people were speaking exactly the same spiritual language - frankly, if I may say so respectfully, I don't believe of you.
Now, I have a question for you.... When God speaks to you, do you always hear Him in English? Or, does He sometimes communicate to you without what we would normally call 'words'?
However, you are still wanting the actual spoken language to be unintelligible to a hearer. I can't see why you want to hold this view.
but He never communicates through me wordlessly and then transmits the sense of that to another person. I would suspect such a process.
Hi Phillip,I'm sorry I haven't responded directly to you. I think philologos has asked for some of the clarification which will help me, as I'm a little confused about what you didn't get in my first post. I'll wait to see what you answer him, before offering any further expanation than I already have in my subsequent posts. I hope that's ok with you.
Hi Ron,Quote: You wrote:I have no doubt that the prophecy had an earlier fulfillment in the experience of Babylon but Paul is not referring to the Babylonian captivity. He is referring to the way in which God had used tongues as a sign to 'unbelieving Jews'. This also explains the phenomena in 1Co 14:21In the law it is written. See Isa 28:11-12, for the quotation. The Jews were there told that for their sins they would be carried into the Assyrian captivity, where they would hear strange languages. This was a judgment. Wherefore, do not force the church to listen to listen to strange tongues which serve to remind of the judgment of Israel.When you get to :23 It explains, the Church should be speaking in understanding to those that are without, that they might be edified and brought into the fold and not say these people are mad speaking in languages not understood.1Co 14:2311If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are sunlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?11. Another argument: the gift of tongues without prophecy is not only unprofitable to the faithful, but also hurts very much, both the faithful as well as the unfaithful, who should be won in the public assemblies. For by this means it comes to pass that the faithful seem to others to be mad, much less can the unfaithful be instructed by it.s. See Ac 4:13.Why must it be so hard to allow people speaking in tongues to understand that they are speaking gibberish and no one understands, why speak these things. Every time I hear a person speak in an unknown tongue, be it a different language such as Russian, or what some say is Angle talk, The Spirit checks me and tells me watch the people speaking, what do you see. So far all I see is a pride in what they are doing. I have pride in my salvation, but it is pride in Christ Jesus for what He has done, not that I speak gibberish and then say what was meant to be said in the first place with understanding, not the prideful gift of spiritual gift that has been given that other might see my spiritual maturity, and how God has blessed me with the gift of tongues. Ac 10:46They heard (êkouon). Imperfect active, were hearing, kept on hearing. Speak (lalountôn). Present active participle, speaking, for they kept it up. With tongues (glôssais). Instrumental case as in Ac 2:4,11 which see. The fuller statement there makes it clear that here it was new and strange tongues (language)that Gentiles never spoke, also as in Ac 19:6; 1Co 14:4-19. This sudden manifestation of the Holy Spirit's power on uncircumcised Gentiles was probably necessary to convince Peter and the six brethren of the circumcision that God had opened the door wide to Gentiles. For Peter then said, "Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? It was proof that a Gentile Pentecost had come and Peter used it effectively in his defence in Jerusalem (Ac 11:15).These are not special heavenly languages, that is tongues, that are a spoken prideful exercise of man to show how a spiritual give brings one into Godliness, in other word watch me and do as I do and God will give you the same gift. The Holy Spirit disperses spiritual gifts as He wills, not as man wills, that goes for speaking to other in their own language that they might understand the Gospel of Paul, which is Christ in them the Hope of Glory. The Holy Spirit would never us a gift to promote the gift receiver to build up anyone but the Gifted One Himself, Jesus Christ. He never spoke without understand to who He was speaking to.In Christ: Phillip
