How "LIMITED" is your thinking on Other Tongues?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you have the maturity (patience) to read something all the way through, carefully and slowly, without judging, you might like this article.
If you lack that ability, don't bother opening this. (It isn't being placed here to listen to arguments about how you "know" what is correct. It's probably too long for you, anyway. LOL)


A New Look At Tongues
 
Last edited:

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you have the maturity to read something all the way through, carefully and slowly, without judging, you might like this article.
If you lack that ability, don't bother opening this. (It isn't being placed here to listen to arguments about how you "know" what is correct.)


A New Look At Tongues
Will read tomorrow, got to up early in the morning for work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hisman and Willie T

DPMartin

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2014
2,698
794
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
there's 5 minutes I'll never get back.


Act 2:4  And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 
Act 2:5  And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 
Act 2:6  Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 
Act 2:7  And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 
Act 2:8  And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 
Act 2:9  Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 
Act 2:10  Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 
Act 2:11  Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. 
Act 2:12  And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? 
Act 2:13  Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. 

here's the interpretation according to those who were there as documented by Luke:

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

note "tongues" plural. and the rest supports that fact seeing many different people of different languages heard in their own tongue. also if I remember correctly he said there were no romans hence need for latin:

Act 2:10  Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,


the guy is full of it.
 

DPMartin

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2014
2,698
794
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'd still like to hear from the mature readers.

so you're saying that feeding yourself something to entertain what is deceptive and not true at all is "mature" correct? or is it immature to not accept the truth that what you've posted, plain old sucks, despite its wordy yarn.
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you have the maturity to read something all the way through, carefully and slowly, without judging, you might like this article.
If you lack that ability, don't bother opening this. (It isn't being placed here to listen to arguments about how you "know" what is correct. It's probably too long for you, anyway. LOL)


A New Look At Tongues

I tried Willie. Read the whole of it but it was way over my head and I couldn’t get what was being said. Waiting to see if others will summarize the points made in the article. That is one reason I stay away from commentaries. Not that they are not useful but often it takes an education to keep up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neddles and Nancy

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you have the maturity to read something all the way through, carefully and slowly, without judging, you might like this article.
If you lack that ability, don't bother opening this. (It isn't being placed here to listen to arguments about how you "know" what is correct. It's probably too long for you, anyway. LOL)


A New Look At Tongues
OK, I've read this. Yes, a long read. The conclusion is simple though. And the response.

;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willie T

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I tried Willie. Read the whole of it but it was way over my head and I couldn’t get what was being said. Waiting to see if others will summarize the points made in the article. That is one reason I stay away from commentaries. Not that they are not useful but often it takes an education to keep up.
Simply stated, the "other tongues" in Acts 2 is reference to anything other then the "holy" tongue, Hebrew. So they spoke in Aramaic, no miracle, but not the Holy Language of Hebrew.

Everyone was so astounded and scandalized that they weren't speaking the Holy Language.

I thought that the example of a Latin Mass was illuminating, towards illustrating a "holy language". Like the priest interrupting the Mass to read from the Message.

@Willie T , have I got it right?

Much love!
 

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Simply stated, the "other tongues" in Acts 2 is reference to anything other then the "holy" tongue, Hebrew. So they spoke in Aramaic, no miracle, but not the Holy Language of Hebrew.

Everyone was so astounded and scandalized that they weren't speaking the Holy Language.

I thought that the example of a Latin Mass was illuminating, towards illustrating a "holy language". Like the priest interrupting the Mass to read from the Message.

@Willie T , have I got it right?

Much love!
I think that is about what he came up with. Actually, I can't say I agree with some of his conclusions. (In truth, he merely commented on various ideas several people worked out.) My main reason for posting that was all the interesting things about people and languages that I never had heard before.

If anyone would like to read it in an easier-to-handle form, I have it on my computer in MS Word format, and will be glad to email it anywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy and marks

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
so you're saying that feeding yourself something to entertain what is deceptive and not true at all is "mature" correct? or is it immature to not accept the truth that what you've posted, plain old sucks, despite its wordy yarn.
I'm saying you didn't "read" 9,896 words in five minutes. And that is just what I asked not be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The reason I ever read it in the first place, is that I honestly do think the same old canned "Shanda la sha bamba" I hear so many preachers blurt out is as phony as a three dollar bill...… even though I DO believe a miracle of HEARING went on that day at Pentecost.

One thing that struck me is that, for decades, I have also jumped to the erroneous conclusion that because 15 locations were listed in Acts 2, that there had to have been at least 15 different languages heard (The author keeps saying, "spoken.")
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I guess it was the thinking in an ancient Jewish context that impressed me so much. We, today, seem to forget to do that with so much that is written in the Bible.... when it is so obvious that the book MUST be read that way..... NOT with 21st Century thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
If you have the maturity to read something all the way through, carefully and slowly, without judging, you might like this article.
Willie, we all have to "judge" what is written by anyone, and we all have to determine whether it lines up with Scripture.

So this author concludes with "The combined insights of linguists, historians, theologians, and experts in Judaica provides this third alternative, which merits further consideration. Perhaps this article will stimulate a reinterpretation of the narrative in Acts 2 and reaffirm the importance of a social-science approach to biblical exegesis."

This paper (1) is geared to scholars communicating with scholars (not such a good idea) (2) is unnecessarily complicated (avoids the KISS principle) and (3) relies too much on "scholars" and "experts" rather than a simple reliance on the Holy Spirit to show us the truth (never a good idea).

His "third alternative" -- that those filled with the Spirit are enabled to boldly proclaim the Gospel and Gospel truth, is according to Scripture (Acts 4), but it is not really a "third alternative".

We still have to decide whether Acts 2 reveals that real, human, foreign languages were spoken supernaturally by the apostles and disciples. And unless we come to Acts 2 with any preconceived ideas, then that is exactly what is revealed. About 15 different languages are listed.

So when we turn to 1 Corinthians, we must interpret what is written there in view of Acts 2. Paul makes it clear that within the church, only two of three people should speak in tongues, but in every case there must also be interpretation (of actual languages). The idea of "ecstatic utterances" and "prayer language" is a modern Pentecostal/Charismatic teaching, and that is based on a misinterpretation of what Paul actually said in 1 Corinthians 14.

1. WHEN THERE IS NO INTERPRETATION ONLY GOD KNOWS WHAT IS SAID (NOT GOOD)

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.

2. INTERPRETATION IS NECESSARY FOR THE EDIFICATION OF OTHERS
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

3. BOTH THE MIND AND THE SPIRIT MUST BE ENGAGED IN WORSHIP
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding [my mind] is unfruitful. 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.

We should keep in mind that this was addressed to Christians in first century apostolic churches. But Paul also said that tongues would cease, therefore it is no longer applicable in the 21st century.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neddles

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
One thing that struck me is that, for decades, I have also jumped to the erroneous conclusion that because 15 locations were listed in Acts 2, that there had to have been at least 15 different languages heard (The author keeps saying, "spoken.")

Act 2:8  And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 

As already noted . . . Not just what they were speaking, the languages of their birthplaces, wasn't it?

Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willie T

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
reaffirm the importance of a social-science approach to biblical exegesis."
I kind of glided right past this!

:oops:

Isn't a "social science approach" more like eisegesis?

Isn't exegesis what comes out of the text?
 

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Willie, we all have to "judge" what is written by anyone, and we all have to determine whether it lines up with Scripture.

So this author concludes with "The combined insights of linguists, historians, theologians, and experts in Judaica provides this third alternative, which merits further consideration. Perhaps this article will stimulate a reinterpretation of the narrative in Acts 2 and reaffirm the importance of a social-science approach to biblical exegesis."

This paper (1) is geared to scholars communicating with scholars (not such a good idea) (2) is unnecessarily complicated (avoids the KISS principle) and (3) relies too much on "scholars" and "experts" rather than a simple reliance on the Holy Spirit to show us the truth (never a good idea).

His "third alternative" -- that those filled with the Spirit are enabled to boldly proclaim the Gospel and Gospel truth, is according to Scripture (Acts 4), but it is not really a "third alternative".

We still have to decide whether Acts 2 reveals that real, human, foreign languages were spoken supernaturally by the apostles and disciples. And unless we come to Acts 2 with any preconceived ideas, then that is exactly what is revealed. About 15 different languages are listed.

So when we turn to 1 Corinthians, we must interpret what is written there in view of Acts 2. Paul makes it clear that within the church, only two of three people should speak in tongues, but in every case there must also be interpretation (of actual languages). The idea of "ecstatic utterances" and "prayer language" is a modern Pentecostal/Charismatic teaching, and that is based on a misinterpretation of what Paul actually said in 1 Corinthians 14.

1. WHEN THERE IS NO INTERPRETATION ONLY GOD KNOWS WHAT IS SAID (NOT GOOD)

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.

2. INTERPRETATION IS NECESSARY FOR THE EDIFICATION OF OTHERS
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

3. BOTH THE MIND AND THE SPIRIT MUST BE ENGAGED IN WORSHIP
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding [my mind] is unfruitful. 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.

We should keep in mind that this was addressed to Christians in first century apostolic churches. But Paul also said that tongues would cease, therefore it is no longer applicable in the 21st century.
Just about all of this post can be addressed by pointing out that Paul had nothing at all to do with any of what went on there, and may not have even known, at the time, that the whole Pentecost scene of Acts 2 ever went on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I kind of glided right past this!

:oops:

Isn't a "social science approach" more like eisegesis?

Isn't exegesis what comes out of the text?
Not necessarily. A CoC preacher once told us all that we have to "put on our sandals" to understand what people of that time period wrote to their contemporaries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Simply stated, the "other tongues" in Acts 2 is reference to anything other then the "holy" tongue, Hebrew. So they spoke in Aramaic, no miracle, but not the Holy Language of Hebrew.

Everyone was so astounded and scandalized that they weren't speaking the Holy Language.

I thought that the example of a Latin Mass was illuminating, towards illustrating a "holy language". Like the priest interrupting the Mass to read from the Message.

@Willie T , have I got it right?

Much love!

thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just about all of this post can be addressed by pointing out that Paul had nothing at all to do with any of it, and may not have even known, at the time, that the whole Pentecost scene of Acts 2 ever went on.
Not to mention, this was, I think, a very different sort of thing than at any other time. I think Pentecost was singularly unique.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy and Willie T