Question for those who believe in "speaking in tongues"...

[Cornelius]

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Forgive me, but you are wrong again. "not unto men" is the part that tell us that even if the whole world of translators were there, they would not understand because:

1) we are not speaking unto men
2) He is speaking IN the spirit
3) he is speaking mysteries.

 

[Cornelius]

1Co 14:2 ..........for no man understandeth.................

No man, means no man. It means that language is not understood by ANY man.Not a human language

 

[Dave Slayer]

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Forgive me, but you are wrong again. "not unto men" is the part that tell us that even if the whole world of translators were there, they would not understand because:

1) we are not speaking unto men
2) He is speaking IN the spirit
3) he is speaking mysteries.

1) They are not speaking to men because no one else us able to understand what is being spoken because there is no interpreter. God is the only one left who can understand since He knows all languages.
2) He is speaking in a spirit, that isn't necessarily the Holy Spirit.
3) He is speaking mysteries because no one understands what is being spoken. Therefore it is a "mystery".

Why would God need people to talk in some baby talk gibberish to get close to Him?

 

[Cornelius]

Sometimes a known language and sometimes (as above) an unknown tongue.

You forget that there is no "unkown" tongue. That was added by translators and is not part of the Bible! Why can't you understand that?

I am not using the KJV , all my quotes from Scripture is from the ASV . I use the word unknown above not as a Bible quote, its my own words, because without using the KJV, the Bible clearly teaches that some tongues are unknown to man.

C

 

[Dave Slayer]

the Bible clearly teaches that some tongues are unknown to man.

They are unknown if they go un-interpreted. Corinth was a place where many foreigners passed though it's harbors. It created a language barrier. Therefore Paul said tongues must be interpreted or not to be spoken at all. The entire context of 1 Corinthians is edification of the entire assembly, interpretation of tongues so that everyone is edified.

 

[Cornelius]

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Forgive me, but you are wrong again. "not unto men" is the part that tell us that even if the whole world of translators were there, they would not understand because:

1) we are not speaking unto men
2) He is speaking IN the spirit
3) he is speaking mysteries.

Yup, I am wrong and you are right. Anyone who doesn't believe in tongues the way you do are always wrong. Whatever man.

1) They are not speaking to men because no one else us able to understand what is being spoken because there is no interpreter. God is the only one left who can understand since He knows all languages.
2) He is speaking in a spirit, that isn't necessarily the Holy Spirit.
3) He is speaking mysteries because no one understands what is being spoken. Therefore it is a "mystery".

Why would God need people to talk in some baby talk gibberish? That to me is non-sense. I do not believe it and if you think I am wrong, so be it. I don't really care what you think.

Let me clarify again:

1Co 14:2 ........ for no man understandeth; .................

See? Not even if there were a thousand interpreters, would they understand, because NO MAN understand. No man, excludes all men.

Also, the Bible does not call for a normal interpreter, but calls for those who have a gift of interpretation. That gift comes from the Holy Spirit too and you cannot study it:

1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret. (why pray if its a human language , just interpret it !)

1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 have all gifts of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? (Notice, interpretation is listed amongst the gifts )

 

[Cornelius]

Paul also lists the two kinds of tongues here:

1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, ..........

 

[Dave Slayer]

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Forgive me, but you are wrong again. "not unto men" is the part that tell us that even if the whole world of translators were there, they would not understand because:

1) we are not speaking unto men
2) He is speaking IN the spirit
3) he is speaking mysteries.

Yup, I am wrong and you are right. Anyone who doesn't believe in tongues the way you do are always wrong. Whatever man.

1) They are not speaking to men because no one else us able to understand what is being spoken because there is no interpreter. God is the only one left who can understand since He knows all languages.
2) He is speaking in a spirit, that isn't necessarily the Holy Spirit.
3) He is speaking mysteries because no one understands what is being spoken. Therefore it is a "mystery".

Why would God need people to talk in some baby talk gibberish? That to me is non-sense. I do not believe it and if you think I am wrong, so be it. I don't really care what you think.

Let me clarify again:

1Co 14:2 ........ for no man understandeth; .................

See? Not even if there were a thousand interpreters, would they understand, because NO MAN understand. No man, excludes all men.

Also, the Bible does not call for a normal interpreter, but calls for those who have a gift of interpretation. That gift comes from the Holy Spirit too and you cannot study it:

1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret. (why pray if its a human language , just interpret it !)

1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 have all gifts of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? (Notice, interpretation is listed amongst the gifts )

Why pray for an interpretation if it's just a human language? Because God gave some the gift of interpretation. Certainly something to pray for given the situation.

As for the rest, I will not bother to repeat myself. I do not interpret these veres the same was as you do. I do not agree with your interpretation but I respect it. I ask you respect that I interpret then differently. I will agree to disagree with you, so let's leave it at that.

 

[Cornelius]

the Bible clearly teaches that some tongues are unknown to man.

They are unknown if they go un-interpreted.

That would make the Holy Spirit less of what and who He is. Surely He knows who is in the assembly and surely He would know to only speak Russian if a Russian is there? Or do you think He does a "hit and miss" ministry?

Paul was correcting the church. You should read my previous post, because I have already proven this fully from Scripture. I have made an effort to quote Scripture in all the post, so its not my opinion.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Paul also lists the two kinds of tongues here:

1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, ..........

Ahh! The most misintepreted scripture of them all!

First, Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. If you read the rest of the chapter, Paul was speaking hyerbolically. Let me show you. The next verse says:

1Cr 13:2 And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

Did Paul understand all mysteries and have all knowledge? No. Did Paul have all faith? No.

Let's look to the next verse:

1Cr 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.

Did Paul give all of his goods to feed the poor? No. Did Paul give his body to be burned? No. He was beheaded.

The phrase "though I" is basically saying "even if". Paul is basically saying "Even if I could do all of these great things and not have love, it is worthless". Paul is simply speaking in hyperboyles to make a point. Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. He said "If I could". Big difference.

 

[Cornelius]

Why pray for an interpretation if it's just a human language?

You should really rather ask this to the Lord, because He is the one who tells you to pray for an interpretation, not I. 1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.

You are asking me to respect error? If I did not love you as a brother , I would do that with pleasure. I would not be walking in love if I just ignored and respected what you say. Your view is very known to me, because I grew up with it and it was taught to you my your leaders, who are also in error. Sorry to be so blunt, but its true. You will find that your leadership will also not be prophesying in church.They believe the gifts are not for today. They are transferring their beliefs unto you...............

 

[Dave Slayer]

Why pray for an interpretation if it's just a human language?

You should really rather ask this to the Lord, because He is the one who tells you to pray for an interpretation, not I. 1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.

You are asking me to respect error? If I did not love you as a brother , I would do that with pleasure. I would not be walking in love if I just ignored and respected what you say. Your view is very known to me, because I grew up with it and it was taught to you my your leaders, who are also in error. Sorry to be so blunt, but its true. You will find that your leadership will also not be prophesying in church.They believe the gifts are not for today. They are transferring their beliefs unto you...............

You believe I am an error, I believe you are in error. Neither of us are perfect and I do not believe we should accuse others of being in error. I do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt I am not in error, but neither do you.

 

[Cornelius]

Paul also lists the two kinds of tongues here:

1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, ..........

Ahh! The most misintepreted scripture of them all!

First, Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. If you read the rest of the chapter, Paul was speaking hyerbolically. Let me show you. The next verse says:

1Cr 13:2 And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

Did Paul understand all mysteries and have all knowledge? No. Did Paul have all faith? No.

Let's look to the next verse:

1Cr 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.

Did Paul give all of his goods to feed the poor? No. Did Paul give his body to be burned? No. He was beheaded.

The phrase "though I" is basically saying "even if". Paul is basically saying "Even if I could do all of these great things and not have love, it is worthless". Paul is simply speaking in hyperboyles to make a point. Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. He said "If I could". Big difference.

You forget one thing. Everything listed , is possible. Were some burnt, if course they were. Have some given all for the poor, of course they have. Will we have all knowledge, of course we will.1Co 2:16 ......But we have the mind of Christ.

Nothing stated is impossible or just used for effect. Paul was simply putting matters into perspective.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Paul also lists the two kinds of tongues here:

1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, ..........

Ahh! The most misintepreted scripture of them all!

First, Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. If you read the rest of the chapter, Paul was speaking hyerbolically. Let me show you. The next verse says:

1Cr 13:2 And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

Did Paul understand all mysteries and have all knowledge? No. Did Paul have all faith? No.

Let's look to the next verse:

1Cr 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.

Did Paul give all of his goods to feed the poor? No. Did Paul give his body to be burned? No. He was beheaded.

The phrase "though I" is basically saying "even if". Paul is basically saying "Even if I could do all of these great things and not have love, it is worthless". Paul is simply speaking in hyperboyles to make a point. Paul never said he spoke in tongues of angels. He said "If I could". Big difference.

You forget one thing. Everything listed , is possible. Were some burnt, if course they were. Have some given all for the poor, of course they have. Will we have all knowledge, of course we will.1Co 2:16 ......But we have the mind of Christ.

Nothing stated is impossible or just used for effect. Paul was simply putting matters into perspective.

Yep, everything is possible. It is possible that I will not buy into this modern day Pentecostal teaching on tongues. ;)

 

[Cornelius]

I believe you are in error. .........

 

[Cornelius]

Well, my day has started and I am off to work........

C

 

[Dave Slayer]

I believe you are in error. .........

Notice I said "I believe you are in error", I did not say "you are in error" There is a difference.

 

[Cornelius]

[quote="Dave Slayer":xivhwwfg] I believe you are in error. .........

Notice I said "I believe you are in error", I did not say "you are in error" There is a difference.[/quote:xivhwwfg]

Please explain the difference to me

 

[Cornelius]

OK, so it will make you happy if I say: Dave, I believe you are in error ? Then that is what I will say:

Dave, I believe you are in error.

C

 

[Dave Slayer]

Please explain the difference to me

Well, to say "you are in error" would mean that I am a know it all who knows for sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are in error. Since I do not know it all, I can't say for sure you are in error. I "believe" you are in error based on my interpretations of the scriptures. I just don't know for sure you are in error, and you do not know for sure I am in error, either. You can believe I am in error and that is fine.