Tongue Speaking not needed today

[Ingledsva]

... 1 Cor. 14:18 is slightly more complex, γλώσσαις is not the indirect object form of the dative, but rather an instrumental dative. "I speak with languages", or "I speak in languages". The dative form demands a preposition like "with" or "in". Your translation renders it "I speak languages" (leaving aside the comparative "more" for a moment), i.e you render it as if it were an accusative like πολλὰ, but in that case it would be γλώσσας instead. No matter what you do with the "more", if you don't include a preposition like "with" or "in" you are not translating it properly, because you are ignoring the information in the dative case. You can get a little bit more about types of datives here although it's also not complete.

That's interesting - however we are talking translation - and adding that - WITH - or IN - does not change the meaning of my translation one iota.

1 Co 14:18 I am Grateful to the Theos that I, - of all of you, - more tongues/languages/ speak.

1 Co 14:18 I am Grateful to the Theos that I, - of all of you, - in or with - more tongues/languages/ speak.

No change in meaning. The "in" or "with" is understood.

It does not go from speaking more languages, - or speaking in/with more languages, - to magic.

*

 

[Rise]

And there is no reason what so ever for the gifts to be supernatural, and even if the gift of knowing FOREIGN Languages was a considered a miracle GIF

What do you call it when an unlearned man speaks fluently in a language he's never known?

That is pretty clearly an example of the Holy Spirit's supernatural intervention, not a natural
phenomenon.

A second question: What would you call "gifts of healing by the Spirit", "miraculous powers", "prophecy", "a message of knowledge or wisdom by the Spirit". If anything in scripture were clearly a supernatural gift then those would be it. They are listed in the same sentence as tongues and interpretation of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:7-11).

Is it any surprise then, that the first thing recorded the disciples did after being baptized in the Holy Spirit was to speak in tongues?

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GIBBERISH OF TODAY - THAT IS CALLED SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

What is the basis for your claim?

Especially since the scripture already establishes for us that there existed in the apostalic era church :
a. Tongues of angels (1 Corinthians 13:1).
b. Tongues that nobody around the speakers were able to understand, but which could be interpreted only by the supernatural aid of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 14).

Especially since 1 Corinthians 14:10 tells us that all languages have meaning, in the context of tongues, which is why Paul tells us that tongues we don't understand should be accompanied by interpretation (Which is also a gift of the Holy Spirit and a manifestation of Him. 1 Corinthians 12:7-11)

As stated - the TEXT - separates them. Have you folks read the whole text in context? Without preconceived ideas that you have been told it means?

You are taking those verses out of context, which I can demonstrate.

If you look at 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, you can clearly see a listing of what are all supernatural gifts, because they are explicitly said they are manifestations of the Spirit, given through the Spirit, and by the Spirit, the work of all the same Spirit, distributed by the Spirit as He determines.

1 Corinthians 12:12-30 does not suggest that some of these gifts are mundane, or even lesser, as you claimed. Rather, the opposite; He is saying that all parts of the body are important, and that one part of the body should not be esteemed above another because they are all functioning equally to serve the whole; even though some "seem" to be weaker they are actually indispensable.

You are misreading verses 27-30 by trying to see them as establishing an order from exceptional and supernatural to normal and mundane. That's not even logically consistent considering that it's already established in scripture that the gift of tongues is a manifestation of the Spirit and that logically speaking in unknown foreign tongues is not a natural occurrence. It's also not a logically consistent way to read that text considering that miracles and healings are listed after teachers, but teaching is often regarded by Christians as a very mundane service while miracles and healings are seen as exceptional manifestations of God's power and Spirit.

I can also show another way you are misunderstanding this verse:
-The manifestations of the Spirit are listed in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11. These are the only gifts said to be actual manifestations of the Holy Spirit. When the supernatural (the Holy Spirit) manifests itself in the natural, that is typically the very definition of a miracle.
-The service offices (Apostle, prophet, pastor, teacher, evangelist) are listed in Ephesians 4:11-13 as a gift God gives to the church rather than a gift given to an individual for the sake of the church (Ie. he gives the individual to the service of the church). It is not said to be a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, or a work of the Holy Spirit Himself.
-1 Corinthians 12:4-6 also alludes to them both by referring to different kinds of gifts distributed by the Spirit and different kinds of service distributed by the Lord.

1 Corinthians 12:27-30, therefore, should not be read as establishing a hierarchy of gifts from supernatural to mundane, but should rightly be read as a Paul pulling in various examples of the various kinds of both gifts and services that God brings to His church to illustrate his point that they are all equally important in whatever form they take.

This - as it stands - is called misdirection.

Neither quote proves your assertion in the sentence.
*

Those quotes are a sample of scripture meant to establish that God's character and desires for humanity don't change, which is why we can expect a certain consistency in how He deals with man throughout history.

For instance, a lot of the miracles we see happen as a result of the Holy Spirit in the early New Testament church, or even today, can also be witnessed to happen in the Old Testament with men like Elijah.
Even going back before the time of Moses we see Abraham prays for a man to be healed (Genesis 20:17), and was called a prophet (Genesis 20:7).

Some theologians might have trouble trying to figure out how or why this happens, but to me it's quite simple: God loves His people, He is willing to respond to His people's requests with supernatural aid, and He wants to make Himself known to the world through His people so that all will come to repentance.

But just because we don't see it recorded that Abraham and Elijah witnessed every kind of miracle seen in the New Testament is not a logical reason to conclude that such things could never have happened in a pre-Pentecost world amongst God's people.
I'm not going to state definitively that they did happen unless we have proof, but I'm not going to rule out the possibility either.

Provide real sources so we can read them for ourselves

Code of the Holy Spirit, Perry Stone, pages 3-4
A conversation with Rabbi Yehuda Getz, rabbi of the western wall in Jerusalem.

When Perry Stone explained he believed in speaking in tongues by the Holy Spirit, Rabbi Getz responded:
"Oh, you mean you have experienced the language of God?"

"It was said as a matter of fact, without any puzzled look or an eye of unbelief".

"My only regret is not asking him for a personal explanation on his references. However, since he was a leading rabbi with tens of thousands of hours of study and a stack of books I have never or may never read, I simply meditated upon his answer".

"The rabbi replied, "It is among the traditions that when the high priest would enter the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement, he could communicate to God in a language that only he and God understood. This ability to speak in and understand the language of God only occured when the high preist was in the holy of holies, and after he exited the sacred chamber, he was no longer able to speak that heavenly tongue."


I too, wish Perry Stone had asked Rabbi Getz exactly where he got that information; if it was an oral tradition he had inherited, or if it was recorded in some Jewish writings.

Regardless; an account like this is not the basis for our belief in the Holy Spirit's gift of tongues, but it is still interesting to consider that the Jews do apparently have an ancient tradition of this happening at some point prior to Pentecost.

 

[Ingledsva]

The onus is on you to prove your statement is true.

I’ve already given you dozens of verses which establish that the Bible shows there exists a clear distinction between the Holy Spirit and false or counterfeit supernatural acts (regardless of how you personally want to define "supernatural" is irrelevant to the fact that this distinction between genuine and counterfeit still exists in scripture). ...

Actually all you have provided is one translation of the texts.

Both the Hebrew, and early Christians , performed all kinds of "magic." The only difference being the name of the God they called on.

We even have the Hebrew casting the equivalent of Runes, and making magic wands from tree branches just like modern Pagans.

Pro 18:18 Contentions cease by (goral) destiny pebbles/casting lots, and makes distinction between the powerful.

Genesis 30:37 – And Jacob took him rods (H4731 divining rods) of green (3892) poplar (3839), and of the Hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled (peeled 6478) white strakes (peelings 6479) in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.

38 – And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

Gen 44:15 And Joseph said unto them, What deed is this that ye have done? wot ye not that such a man as I can certainly divine (H5172 twice)?

nachash - A primitive root; properly to hiss, that is, whisper a (magic) spell; generally to prognosticate: - X certainly, divine, enchanter, (use) X enchantment,

*
Christians cast spells and sent out magic cloths, etc.

Act 19:11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:

Act 19:12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.

Interestingly Jesus told his disciple not to stop other groups' magic workers that were using his name in their magic.

Mar 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle (work power) in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

What do you call it when an unlearned man speaks fluently in a language he's never known?

That is pretty clearly an example of the Holy Spirit's supernatural intervention, not a natural
phenomenon.

A second question: What would you call "gifts of healing by the Spirit", "miraculous powers", "prophecy", "a message of knowledge or wisdom by the Spirit". If anything in scripture were clearly a supernatural gift then those would be it. They are listed in the same sentence as tongues and interpretation of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:7-11).

Is it any surprise then, that the first thing recorded the disciples did after being baptized in the Holy Spirit was to speak in tongues?



What is the basis for your claim?

Especially since the scripture already establishes for us that there existed in the apostalic era church :
a. Tongues of angels (1 Corinthians 13:1).
b. Tongues that nobody around the speakers were able to understand, but which could be interpreted only by the supernatural aid of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 14).

Especially since 1 Corinthians 14:10 tells us that all languages have meaning, in the context of tongues, which is why Paul tells us that tongues we don't understand should be accompanied by interpretation (Which is also a gift of the Holy Spirit and a manifestation of Him. 1 Corinthians 12:7-11)



You are taking those verses out of context, which I can demonstrate.

If you look at 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, you can clearly see a listing of what are all supernatural gifts, because they are explicitly said they are manifestations of the Spirit, given through the Spirit, and by the Spirit, the work of all the same Spirit, distributed by the Spirit as He determines.

1 Corinthians 12:12-30 does not suggest that some of these gifts are mundane, or even lesser, as you claimed. Rather, the opposite; He is saying that all parts of the body are important, and that one part of the body should not be esteemed above another because they are all functioning equally to serve the whole; even though some "seem" to be weaker they are actually indispensable.

You are misreading verses 27-30 by trying to see them as establishing an order from exceptional and supernatural to normal and mundane. That's not even logically consistent considering that it's already established in scripture that the gift of tongues is a manifestation of the Spirit and that logically speaking in unknown foreign tongues is not a natural occurrence. It's also not a logically consistent way to read that text considering that miracles and healings are listed after teachers, but teaching is often regarded by Christians as a very mundane service while miracles and healings are seen as exceptional manifestations of God's power and Spirit.

I can also show another way you are misunderstanding this verse:
-The manifestations of the Spirit are listed in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11. These are the only gifts said to be actual manifestations of the Holy Spirit. When the supernatural (the Holy Spirit) manifests itself in the natural, that is typically the very definition of a miracle.
-The service offices (Apostle, prophet, pastor, teacher, evangelist) are listed in Ephesians 4:11-13 as a gift God gives to the church rather than a gift given to an individual for the sake of the church (Ie. he gives the individual to the service of the church). It is not said to be a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, or a work of the Holy Spirit Himself.
-1 Corinthians 12:4-6 also alludes to them both by referring to different kinds of gifts distributed by the Spirit and different kinds of service distributed by the Lord.

1 Corinthians 12:27-30, therefore, should not be read as establishing a hierarchy of gifts from supernatural to mundane, but should rightly be read as a Paul pulling in various examples of the various kinds of both gifts and services that God brings to His church to illustrate his point that they are all equally important in whatever form they take.



The quotes are a sample of scripture meant to establish that God's character doesn't change.
For instance, a lot of the miracles we see happen as a result of the Holy Spirit in the early New Testament church, or even today, can also be witnessed to happen in the Old Testament with men like Elijah.
Even going back before the time of Moses we see Abraham prays for a man to be healed (Genesis 20:17), and was called a prophet (Genesis 20:7).

But just because we don't see it recorded that Abraham and Elijah witnessed every kind of miracle seen in the New Testament is not a logical reason to conclude that such things could never have happened in a pre-Pentecost world amongst God's people.


Code of the Holy Spirit, Perry Stone, pages 3-4
A conversation with Rabbi Yehuda Getz, rabbi of the western wall in Jerusalem.

When Perry Stone explained he believed in speaking in tongues by the Holy Spirit, Rabbi Getz responded:
"Oh, you mean you have experienced the language of God?"

"It was said as a matter of fact, without any puzzled look or an eye of unbelief".

"My only regret is not asking him for a personal explanation on his references. However, since he was a leading rabbi with tens of thousands of hours of study and a stack of books I have never or may never read, I simply meditated upon his answer".

"The rabbi replied, "It is among the traditions that when the high priest would enter the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement, he could communicate to God in a language that only he and God understood. This ability to speak in and understand the language of God only occured when the high preist was in the holy of holies, and after he exited the sacred chamber, he was no longer able to speak that heavenly tongue."


I too, wish Perry Stone had asked him about where Rabbi Getz exactly where he got that information; if it was just an oral tradition he had inherited, or if it was recorded in some Jewish writings.

An account like this is not the basis for our faith in the Holy Spirit's gift of tongues, but it is interesting to consider that the Jews do apparently have an ancient tradition of this happening at some point prior to Pentecost.

Perry Stone is an evangelist with an agenda. We have no way of knowing this conversation actually took place. There is no documentation.

And just as a side-kick - they used hallucinogens in the Temple incense, so if The High Priest did mumble something, it could also have just been because he was high.

As to 1Co 13:1 - You have misread it's meaning. It is not saying he speaks with the languages of angels. It means EVEN if I speak ...

1Co 13:1 (Even) 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.

Also - aggelos - is also messenger, or pastor, etc.

*

 

[Rise]

Actually all you have provided is one translation of the texts.

I didn't quote any specific translation, I just gave scripture references (aside from a couple verses that the forum wouldn't hyperlink). I doubt you'll find any translation that alters the meaning of those scriptures I referenced.

If you think otherwise then you would need to provide some evidence that the verses should be translated differently, and why such a translation leads to a change in meaning that supports your position or disproves my conclusions.

Both the Hebrew, and early Christians , performed all kinds of "magic." .

Although I could address the specific assertions you make about some instances in the Bible; I believe it would be more helpful first, for the sake of clarity, that you to establish a few things:

1. What is your definition of magic?
2. How do you believe "magic" differs from the acts of the Holy Spirit working through men?
3. What does your assertion (that Christians and Jews practiced magic) have to do with attempting to disprove the idea that scripture clearly says there is a difference between true and false miracles, or that which is done by the Holy Spirit vs that which is done by demons?

For reference, I will quote again the scriptures I already posted and I ask you to specify how your points relate to the scriptures and conclusions contained therein:

John 4:22
John 4:24
Deuteronomy 12:6

Not everyone who thinks they are worshipping the one true God are.
You can't do whatever you want and then claim you're doing it for God.

Acts 2:38
John 15:4
Matthew 7:16
1 John 2:2-4
John 14:23
John 15:16
Matthew 7:22
Deuteronomy 13:2-4
2 Corinthians 11:4
Acts 2:8
Acts 1:4-5
Acts 1:8
Acts 2:3-4

You must be in Jesus, obeying and abiding, to recieve the Holy Spirit.
That is judged by fruit.
Not everyone who appears to be doing supernatural works is in Jesus.

1 Corinthians 12:4
1 Corinthians 12:10

The gifts of the Holy Spirit come only through the Holy Spirit.

Scripturally, no one moves in any genuine gift of the Holy Spirit without the Holy Spirit.
Those who have the Holy Spirit are, by any Biblical definition, Christians.
You either have the Holy Spirit or you are operating in a counterfeit spirit.

-------------------

Satan counterfeits and deceives:
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
Galatians 1:8
1 Timothy 4:1-2
2 Peter 2:1
2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
Revelation 12:9

Not everyone who thinks they are worshiping God, are:
John 4:22
John 4:24

Not all who appear to operate in the gift of Knowledge or Prophecy are actually operating in the Holy Spirit.
Deuteronomy 13:1-3
1 Kings 22:23
Jeremiah 14:14
Jeremiah 23:9-11
Jeremiah 23:16-18
Jeremiah 23:21-22
Jeremiah 23:33-36
Jeremiah 5:11-13
Lamentations 2:14
Ezekiel 13:6-7
Matthew 7:13
Matthew 20-23
Matthew 24:3-5
Matthew 10-11
Acts 16:16
As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling.
Acts 16:18
And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

Not everyone who appears to operating in a gift of signs and wonders is doing so by the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 24:24
Matthew 25:25
Exodus 7:11, Exodus 8:18
2 Thessalonians 2:9

Although some have been given supernatural strength by the Holy Spirit, not everyone who appears to have supernatural strength does so by the Holy Spirit:
Judges 14:6
Luke 8:29

God draws a distinction between the way pagans worship, and the way His people are to worship. What they were doing was not acceptable.
Deuteronomy 12:4
Matthew 6:7-8

We must spiritually discern the difference by the Holy Spirit.
1 John 2:22-26
1 Corinthians 2:14
1 Thessalonians 5:20-21
1 John 4:1
1 Corinthians 14:29

Ultimately satan, despite appearing to have some power, has no power when it comes to those empowered by God:
1 Kings 18:28-29
Exodus 8:18
Luke 10:19

This theme and pattern is well established all throughout scripture.

The only difference being the name of the God they called on.

Scripture gives no indication that the followers of Jesus were calling on a different God than the followers of God in the Old Testament.
The early church fathers understood themselves to be calling on the same God.

So on what basis, scriptural or historical, do you try to you claim that the Jews and Christians (who originally were Jews as well) were calling on different Gods?

As to 1Co 13:1 - You have misread it's meaning. It is not saying he speaks with the languages of angels. It means EVEN if I speak ...

1Co 13:1 (Even) 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.

Also - aggelos - is also messenger, or pastor, etc.

There's a three problems with your post:

1. Aggelos:
Definition: a messenger, generally a (supernatural) messenger from God, an angel, conveying news or behests from God to men.

http://biblehub.com/greek/32.htm

Examples of aggelos referring to heavenly messengers:
Matthew 1:20
Luke 1:13
Galatians 1:8

You will also find all throughout the ancient greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, that instances of angelic beings are referred to as "aggelos", because the Hebrew word often translated as "angel" (malak) also carries with it the same connotation of being a messenger - yet from the contexts we know it is clearly not always speaking of an earthly messenger.

2. The greek of 1 Corinthians 13:1 doesn't say "even" before the sentence.
Nor does any translation put it there.

In fact, the King James Bible, American King James Version, and Websters Bible Translation say:
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels"

3. Even if we assumed what you say is true, it doesn't actually counter the original point I made - which is that according to 1 Corinthians 14 we know that tongues can be legitimate manifestations of the Holy Spirit yet still not be understood by the natural ear, requiring interpretation by the Holy Spirit to edify the church.

 

[Ingledsva]

I didn't quote any specific translation, I just gave scripture references (aside from a couple verses that the forum wouldn't hyperlink). I doubt you'll find any translation that alters the meaning of those scriptures I referenced.

If you think otherwise then you would need to provide some evidence that the verses should be translated differently, and why such a translation leads to a change in meaning that supports your position or disproves my conclusions.

I already have, and will continue to do so.

Although I could address the specific assertions you make about some instances in the Bible; I believe it would be more helpful first, for the sake of clarity, that you to establish a few things:

1. What is your definition of magic?
2. How do you believe "magic" differs from the acts of the Holy Spirit working through men?
3. What does your assertion (that Christians and Jews practiced magic) have to do with attempting to disprove the idea that scripture clearly says there is a difference between true and false miracles, or that which is done by the Holy Spirit vs that which is done by demons?

For reference, I will quote again the scriptures I already posted and I ask you to specify how your points relate to the scriptures and conclusions contained therein:

Magic is magic. The Hebrew did everything the Pagans did. Made magic wands (I gave the verses), made curses (bear and murdered children comes to mind,) cast lots, Joseph says he is a sorcerer (one that uses scrying,) etc. As I said - the only difference was the name of the God.

Scripture gives no indication that the followers of Jesus were calling on a different God than the followers of God in the Old Testament.
The early church fathers understood themselves to be calling on the same God.

So on what basis, scriptural or historical, do you try to you claim that the Jews and Christians (who originally were Jews as well) were calling on different Gods?

You were not paying attention. The Hebrew and Christian magicians were no different then the Pagan magicians, other then the name of the God used in the magic.

There's a three problems with your post:

1. Aggelos:
Definition: a messenger, generally a (supernatural) messenger from God, an angel, conveying news or behests from God to men.

http://biblehub.com/greek/32.htm

Examples of aggelos referring to heavenly messengers:
Matthew 1:20
Luke 1:13
Galatians 1:8

You will also find all throughout the ancient greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, that instances of angelic beings are referred to as "aggelos", because the Hebrew word often translated as "angel" (malak) also carries with it the same connotation of being a messenger - yet from the contexts we know it is clearly not always speaking of an earthly messenger.

You really should look up the words before posting.

Strong's - From ἀγγέλλω aggellō (probably derived from G71; compare G34; to bring tidings); a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication a pastor: - angel, messenger.

And here is a verse using it as messengers - Luk 7:24 And when the messengers of John were departed, he began to speak unto the people concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A reed shaken with the wind?

2. The greek of 1 Corinthians 13:1 doesn't say "even" before the sentence.
Nor does any translation put it there.

In fact, the King James Bible, American King James Version, and Websters Bible Translation say:
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels"

3. Even if we assumed what you say is true, it doesn't actually counter the original point I made - which is that according to 1 Corinthians 14 we know that tongues can be legitimate manifestations of the Holy Spirit yet still not be understood by the natural ear, requiring interpretation by the Holy Spirit to edify the church.

I used the Darby translation, - and here also is the Douay-Rheims - Note those - IFs - and that - And if I should. These show that the meaning is "Even If" (which is what I said) - and which I might add, is also the understanding of the meaning when using "though."

1Co 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.

1Co 13:1 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.

1Co 13:2 And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

I found this interesting to this discussion, - Albert Barnes Notes On The Bible -

"Though I speak with the tongues of men - Though I should be able to speak all the languages which are spoken by people. To speak foreign languages was regarded then, as it is now, as a rare and valuable endowment; compare Virgil, Aeneas vi. 625ff. The word "I" here is used in a popular sense, and the apostle designs to illustrate, as he often does, his idea by a reference to himself, which, it is evident, he wishes to be understood as applying to those whom he addressed. It is evident that among the Corinthians the power of speaking a foreign language was regarded as a signally valuable endowment; and there can be no doubt that some of the leaders in that church valued themselves especially on it; see 1 Cor. 14. To correct this, and to show them that all this would be vain without love, and to induce them, therefore, to seek for love as a more valuable endowment, was the design of the apostle in this passage. Of this verse Dr. Bloomfield, than whom, perhaps, there is no living man better qualified to give such an opinion, remarks, that "it would be difficult to find a finer passage than this in the writings of Demosthenes himself."

And of angels - The language of angels; such as they speak. Were I endowed with the faculty of eloquence and persuasion which we attribute to them; and the power of speaking to any of the human family with the power which they have. The language of angels here seems to be used to denote the highest power of using language, or of the most elevated faculty of eloquence and speech.

*

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I’m not interested your opinion or my opinion. I’m interested in what God says is true

Who told you it was true? The authors? Is that how we verify facts?

God’s word communicated and recorded on paper is still God’s word.

God's Word written in our hearts can't be burned or thrown away or vandalized.

eternal truth never changes, and His character never changes

Change IS an eternal truth, or you wouldn't need more than one testament in the bible, no?

The Bible only becomes the realm of opinion if you believe you get to pick and choose which verses are legitimate and which ones aren’t.

The "all or nothing" approach is a cop-out for the lazy. You can study these things to see which verses are likely to be "authentic" or at least as close to "authentic" as we're ever going to see. If a scene is out of character, or written in a different style, or has anachronisms, etc ... those are likely false or just VERY bad writing and you'd think God would dictate to the authors some command of the narrative.

Is it then possible for us to state factually that the Bible says God created the sky and made it blue?

But it's not always blue.

This presumption underlies Christianity: 2 Timothy 3:16.

It also inspires horrifying evil, so ...

I’ve already given you dozens of verses which establish that the Bible shows there exists a clear distinction between the Holy Spirit and false or counterfeit supernatural acts (regardless of how you personally want to define "supernatural" is irrelevant to the fact that this distinction between genuine and counterfeit still exists in scripture).

But what are the real attributes that differentiate them? Even Jesus condemns looking for signs in at least one Gospel. Miracles aren't proof of crap because it was well known others could do them too.

What do you call it when an unlearned man speaks fluently in a language he's never known?

How would a non-speaker of that language know you're now fluent in something they don't speak? If I do some random coughing in your face, are you geek enough to tell me if my Klingon is good?

And there are also strokes that can provide you with foreign accents if not fluent language, so ...

Especially since the scripture already establishes for us that there existed in the apostalic era church :
a. Tongues of angels (1 Corinthians 13:1).
b. Tongues that nobody around the speakers were able to understand, but which could be interpreted only by the supernatural aid of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 14).

If the Holy Spirit can speak directly to the "translators", why not to the public? Why not just say what needs to be said directly?

Especially since 1 Corinthians 14:10 tells us that all languages have meaning, in the context of tongues, which is why Paul tells us that tongues we don't understand should be accompanied by interpretation (Which is also a gift of the Holy Spirit and a manifestation of Him. 1 Corinthians 12:7-11)

So we don't need the Holy Spirit, because the guy scamming you can convince you what the foreign speaker is saying is true.

Those quotes are a sample of scripture meant to establish that God's character and desires for humanity don't change, which is why we can expect a certain consistency in how He deals with man throughout history.

Garden of Eden God: Don't be like Me.
Tower of Babel God: Don't be like Me.
Every king or leader with hubris God: Don't be like Me.
Jesus: Be like God.

For instance, a lot of the miracles we see happen as a result of the Holy Spirit in the early New Testament church, or even today, can also be witnessed to happen in the Old Testament with men like Elijah.

He had a really cool UFO chariot, though.

Some theologians might have trouble trying to figure out how or why this happens, but to me it's quite simple: God loves His people, He is willing to respond to His people's requests with supernatural aid, and He wants to make Himself known to the world through His people so that all will come to repentance.

No He doesn't. You say we need "interpreters" to hear God. I call shenanigans. It's obvious that clergy or other spiritual leaders demand social authority and will say anything to get it. If God can speak to them, He can speak to anyone. Maybe not in the same way, but God isn't dumb, so I figure He can figure it out.

"The rabbi replied, "It is among the traditions that when the high priest would enter the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement, he could communicate to God in a language that only he and God understood. This ability to speak in and understand the language of God only occured when the high preist was in the holy of holies, and after he exited the sacred chamber, he was no longer able to speak that heavenly tongue."

IF they were the only ones in there, how do the authors know what it sounded like? I can't remember who it was, but wasn't it revealed at one point (I guess in the OT) that priests were eating the sacrifices meant for God (since God doesn't eat)? They could be watching porn in there, for all we know.

1. What is your definition of magic?

Trying to acquire a result that does not logically follow from the problem, like praying a tornado doesn't demolish your house instead of having really good building codes or wearing talismans to get pregnant instead of getting laid...

2. How do you believe "magic" differs from the acts of the Holy Spirit working through men?

If a house needs building and the Holy Spirit doesn't pick up a hammer or a 2x4, yes, it's magic.

3. What does your assertion (that Christians and Jews practiced magic) have to do with attempting to disprove the idea that scripture clearly says there is a difference between true and false miracles, or that which is done by the Holy Spirit vs that which is done by demons?

Because we see when the apostles try to exclude others not in the group from doing miracles in Jesus' name that they have a problem with narcissism. THEY want the monopoly on the crowds and anyone else just gets in their way, despite what Jesus specifically told them about that.

 

[Rise]

Magic is magic.

If you can't define what magic is then we can't examine the scripture to determine if your accusation is true. We need a working definition of what magic is before we can establish whether or not certain people in the Bible were using it.

Given that you don't have a definition, I will give you my definition of "magic" which is based on scripture.
I would say magic is a broad term that describes any attempt to access or operate in spiritual power without going through Jesus, via the Holy Spirit, as a part of having a relationship with the one true God. This can include a broad range of things mentioned in scripture which God specifically condemns, such as witchcraft, divination, mediumship, sorcery, etc.

To put it another way: Magic is rebellion to God. People use it to gain power and control over their circumstances, instead of trusting in God to provide what is needed. Unfortunately for them, like in the Garden of Eden, these people are trading the superior blessing of God for a deceptive counterfeit that only leads to death.

Here's one example of what I mean:
Isaiah 8:19-20
God has already provided a way through Himself for us to gain insight into the future, wisdom about what we should do, and knowledge about our circumstances. Isaiah is rebuking the Israelites for not seeking God for guidance, but seeking idolatrous forms of guidance instead. We see later that those who trusted in false prophets (those not speaking on behalf of God), suffered terribly when the Babylonians invaded and destroyed Jerusalem. If they had listened to God's true prophets then they would have not made the bad decisions that led to that event.

Jehoshaphat demonstrates the right attitude in 2 Kings 3:11.
Rather than listen to the multitude of false prophets telling them they should go to battle, he asks if there is a genuine prophet of God whom they can consult.
Ahab, however, chose not to listen to the warning of the genuine prophet of God, and died in battle.

So one important thing to keep in mind about these false and counterfeit spiritual operations: God forbids them for our own sake. It's not just an ego thing on His part, as some claim. Entertaining these lying sources leads only to death and destruction; for satan comes to kill, steal and destroy, but God comes to give us life more abundantly. John 10:10.
God loves us enough to tell us to avoid that which leads to death, just as he warned Adam in the Garden of Eden not to eat from the tree that leads to death.

The Hebrew did everything the Pagans did. Made magic wands (I gave the verses), made curses (bear and murdered children comes to mind,) cast lots, Joseph says he is a sorcerer (one that uses scrying,) etc. As I said - the only difference was the name of the God.

You didn't address my third question, which was the most important because it would establish for us what exactly you are trying to dispute about my original post.

I will pose the question another way for you:

Let's start with this verse: 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10

It clearly says that there is such a thing as lying signs and wonders. The New Living Translation paraphrases this as "the work of Satan with counterfeit power and signs and miracles".

This verse, being just one example of the dozens I already posted for you, establishes that the Bible teaches us there exists a clear difference between the genuine miraculous works of the Holy Spirit and counterfeit works that serve to advance the lies of satan.

Now, since you appear to be trying to disagree with my original statement that such a distinction exists in scripture, I must ask you to demonstrate how anything you posted disproves the idea that the Bible does not draw a distinction between true and false miracles; especially when we can see the scripture plainly states it right before our eyes. You have to contend not only with this one verse that is quite explicit, but a whole range of verses throughout the Bible that convey this same message to us. If you can't find a way to explain away all those verses then you can't claim the Bible does not draw a distinction between true and counterfeit miracles.

Although I could debate the specific instances of scripture you cite, I think at this point that would only serve to distract from the central issue that you were trying to dsipute; Either the Bible says there is a distinction between true and false spiritual operations or it does not. That must first be established before we can move forward with understanding other areas of scripture. The truth is the scripture does draw such a distinction, very clearly and consistently from beginning to end, therefore we must the read the rest of the Bible in that context if we want to draw accurate conclusions about what the Bible is saying.

You really should look up the words before posting.

I just gave you a definition of Aggelos with a hyperlink to the source. One of the definitions of Aggelos is "celestial messenger".
http://biblehub.com/greek/32.htm

I also gave you three examples in scripture where the context makes it clear we are dealing with heavenly messengers:
Matthew 1:20
Luke 1:13
Galatians 1:8

Are you trying to claim that those verses do not refer to a heavenly messenger? if so, on what scriptural or linguistic basis do you make that claim?

Maybe you are confused and don't realize that aggelos can refer to both an eartlhy or a heavenly messenger. The context usually makes this clear.

- Note those - IFs - and that - And if I should.

As stimulating as I'm sure it might be to debate the semantics of the word "if", I think I can save us both a lot of time by backing up and pointing you to something which you ignored twice already:

1 Corinthians 14

This chapter clearly establishes for us that legitimate gifts of tongues are not always that which will be understood by the immediate hearers.
In fact, the only way to understand those legitimate gifts of tongues is to use the gift of interpretation by the Holy Spirit.

So at this point, since 1 Corinthians 14 already disproves your point, it becomes superfluous to try and debate whether or not 1 Corinthians 13:1 refers to heavenly tongues or not because we've already established from other scripture that non-understandable tongues do exist and are legitimate manifestations of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Rise]

But what are the real attributes that differentiate them?

That is a good question, and one which can be answered through Scripture.
I addressed some of that in my post above already where I define "magic" in the context of scripture.

The simple answer is: Anything done by the empowering of the Holy Spirit is legal, encouraged, and intended by God to build up His people and bring His Kingdom to earth. Because it is the Holy Spirit doing it, and not you or a spirit opposed to God, then by definition it is always good and in line with God's will.

Satan and the world have counterfeits which he wants to deceive people into putting their trust in something that will cause them to turn from God. A clear example would be any spiritual act done by the power of demons. That's idolatry, it's illegal, and the reason we avoid it is for our own good because satan comes only to steal, kill, and destroy.

Even Jesus condemns looking for signs in at least one Gospel. Miracles aren't proof of crap because it was well known others could do them too.

You are taking that passage out of context.

Jesus actually did perform signs everywhere he went:
John 7:31
John 21:25

Looking at the passages in context:
Mark 8:11. Matthew 16. Luke 11.
Compare with Luke 4:22-30

They were called wicked because they did not repent based on what Jesus had already said and did (which was a lot). Because of that it is said certain people of the past will condemn them for their unbelief and unreptenence. He doesn't say they will be condemned because they sought a sign.

It was their heart condition, of unbelief and wickeness, that led them to demand Jesus perform miracles on demand to satisify them; because they were skeptics opposed to Him and offended by Him. They weren't genuine seekers of truth.

Keep in mind, we're talking about people who plotted to kill Lazarus, the man Jesus raised from the dead, specifically because they didn't want proof walking around that Jesus had performed such a miracle. John 12:10.

Nothing would have been good enough for a people like that, and Jesus knows the hearts of all men. John 2:24-25.
Jesus doesn't need to prove Himself to anyone or win their approval. He will, however, reveal Himself to a genuine seeker of truth. Matthew 7:7.

How would a non-speaker of that language know you're now fluent in something they don't speak?

Acts 2:4-8
And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?

You say we need "interpreters" to hear God.

You have a misunderstanding of what I've said, and what scripture says, if you think God only speaks through the interpretation of the gift of tongues.

If the Holy Spirit can speak directly to the "translators", why not to the public? Why not just say what needs to be said directly?

God spoke to Abraham and Moses plainly, directly, face to face.
Numbers 12:8
Exodus 33:11
Genesis 17:1-2
Genesis 18:1-3

God spoke audibly to Israel in the desert, and at other instances:
Exodus 20:18-22
Matthew 3:17
Matthew 17:5-6
Notice how the Israelites in Exodus 20 didn't actually want to hear the rest of what God had to say to them.

God also speaks through prophets throughout scripture. In fact, prophesy is one of the New Testament gifts of the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:7-10

1 Corinthians 14 makes it clear that tongues, when interpreted, is the the same as prophecy. Because a tongue in the Holy Spirit is God speaking, any interpretation of that tongue then becomes a prophecy by definition because it is revealing the word of God to people.

If you are asking: "Why doesn't God just speak to everyone plainly". The answer can also be found in scripture.
Matthew 13:10-12
Luke 8:9-10
Matthew 11:21-26

Part of the reason is people are accountable to be obedient to the truth they know. The more clearly it is spoken to them the more accountable they are.
Also part of the reason is that God often hides His messages in parable or dreams so only those who are genuinely seeking truth will seek God for the answer. Others will dismiss it.

If God can speak to them, He can speak to anyone.

As the Bible shows us, God can speak plainly to anyone He wants to, but has chosen not to force Himself on everyone like that.

Garden of Eden God: Don't be like Me.
Tower of Babel God: Don't be like Me.
Every king or leader with hubris God: Don't be like Me.
Jesus: Be like God.

You've actually tried to say that to me before, and I already showed you why you misunderstand scripture, but you never responded to it. So I'll just repost it for you here:

Your attempted paraphrase hides the actual truth contained in the scripture:

Genesis 1:26-27
God: "I created you to be like me".

Genesis 3:5
Satan: "You aren't like God. He's lying to you. Rebel against God and only then will you be like Him."
(Effectively Satan is trying to make man like him, as the one who rebelled against God and was cast down from heaven)

Genesis 11:4
Man: "Let's work our way up to Heaven and set our own name up in Heaven as an idol, not acknowledging God."
(Man is at this point reflecting the desire of Satan to make himself a replacement for God, as believed to be represented in Isaiah 14:12).

Matthew 5:48
Jesus: "Be who you where created to be originally, like God, without rebellion towards Him."

IF they were the only ones in there, how do the authors know what it sounded like?

The authors of what? And why would they need to know what the tongue of the High Priest sounded like in order to relay the tradition that the High Priest spoke in a tongue only He and God could understand on the day of atonement? I don't follow what logic you're trying to use here.

I can't remember who it was, but wasn't it revealed at one point (I guess in the OT) that priests were eating the sacrifices meant for God (since God doesn't eat)?

You must be confused. In the levitical law, there is no ritual that requires them to leave food out with the expectation that God Himself will come and eat it. That is, actually, something we see in ancient pagan rituals.

In scripture it actually states that the sacrifices are suppose to be eaten by the priests, by the offerers, or consumed entirely by fire, based on the type of sacrifice.

There was bread on the table of showbread in the Inner Court. It was specified in leviticus 24:9 to be eaten by the priests on the sabbath, after the bread had sat on the table all week.

Because we see when the apostles try to exclude others not in the group from doing miracles in Jesus' name that they have a problem with narcissism. THEY want the monopoly on the crowds and anyone else just gets in their way, despite what Jesus specifically told them about that.

You are trying to draw conclusions that passage cannot support.
Luke 9:49-50
You are right to say that, in their pride, the disciples were doing something wrong.
Jesus rebuked them because the man actually was for Jesus. He wasn't working for satan, and probably wasn't working for himself either. Jesus was able to discern the difference, and didn't have wrong motives clouding His judgement.

However, you would be completely wrong if you try to take that passage beyond it's context and conclude that anyone doing anything spiritual automatically is considered to be "for Jesus". Scripture already shows us that's not true.

Jesus Himself was the one who told us that there will come false prophets and false miracle workers. Matthew 24:24.
Jesus also told us that not everyone who claims to do things in His name actually is: Matthew 7:22-23

 

[Ingledsva]

If you can't define what magic is then we can't examine the scripture to determine if your accusation is true. We need a working definition of what magic is before we can establish whether or not certain people in the Bible were using it.

Given that you don't have a definition, I will give you my definition of "magic" which is based on scripture.
I would say magic is a broad term that describes any attempt to access or operate in spiritual power without going through Jesus, via the Holy Spirit, as a part of having a relationship with the one true God. This can include a broad range of things mentioned in scripture which God specifically condemns, such as witchcraft, divination, mediumship, sorcery, etc.

To put it another way: Magic is rebellion to God. People use it to gain power and control over their circumstances, instead of trusting in God to provide what is needed. Unfortunately for them, like in the Garden of Eden, these people are trading the superior blessing of God for a deceptive counterfeit that only leads to death.

Here's one example of what I mean:
Isaiah 8:19-20
God has already provided a way through Himself for us to gain insight into the future, wisdom about what we should do, and knowledge about our circumstances. Isaiah is rebuking the Israelites for not seeking God for guidance, but seeking idolatrous forms of guidance instead. We see later that those who trusted in false prophets (those not speaking on behalf of God), suffered terribly when the Babylonians invaded and destroyed Jerusalem. If they had listened to God's true prophets then they would have not made the bad decisions that led to that event.

Jehoshaphat demonstrates the right attitude in 2 Kings 3:11.
Rather than listen to the multitude of false prophets telling them they should go to battle, he asks if there is a genuine prophet of God whom they can consult.
Ahab, however, chose not to listen to the warning of the genuine prophet of God, and died in battle.

So one important thing to keep in mind about these false and counterfeit spiritual operations: God forbids them for our own sake. It's not just an ego thing on His part, as some claim. Entertaining these lying sources leads only to death and destruction; for satan comes to kill, steal and destroy, but God comes to give us life more abundantly. John 10:10.
God loves us enough to tell us to avoid that which leads to death, just as he warned Adam in the Garden of Eden not to eat from the tree that leads to death.



You didn't address my third question, which was the most important because it would establish for us what exactly you are trying to dispute about my original post.

I will pose the question another way for you:

Let's start with this verse: 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10

It clearly says that there is such a thing as lying signs and wonders. The New Living Translation paraphrases this as "the work of Satan with counterfeit power and signs and miracles".

This verse, being just one example of the dozens I already posted for you, establishes that the Bible teaches us there exists a clear difference between the genuine miraculous works of the Holy Spirit and counterfeit works that serve to advance the lies of satan.

Now, since you appear to be trying to disagree with my original statement that such a distinction exists in scripture, I must ask you to demonstrate how anything you posted disproves the idea that the Bible does not draw a distinction between true and false miracles; especially when we can see the scripture plainly states it right before our eyes. You have to contend not only with this one verse that is quite explicit, but a whole range of verses throughout the Bible that convey this same message to us. If you can't find a way to explain away all those verses then you can't claim the Bible does not draw a distinction between true and counterfeit miracles.

Although I could debate the specific instances of scripture you cite, I think at this point that would only serve to distract from the central issue that you were trying to dsipute; Either the Bible says there is a distinction between true and false spiritual operations or it does not. That must first be established before we can move forward with understanding other areas of scripture. The truth is the scripture does draw such a distinction, very clearly and consistently from beginning to end, therefore we must the read the rest of the Bible in that context if we want to draw accurate conclusions about what the Bible is saying.



I just gave you a definition of Aggelos with a hyperlink to the source. One of the definitions of Aggelos is "celestial messenger".
http://biblehub.com/greek/32.htm

I also gave you three examples in scripture where the context makes it clear we are dealing with heavenly messengers:
Matthew 1:20
Luke 1:13
Galatians 1:8

Are you trying to claim that those verses do not refer to a heavenly messenger? if so, on what scriptural or linguistic basis do you make that claim?

Maybe you are confused and don't realize that aggelos can refer to both an eartlhy or a heavenly messenger. The context usually makes this clear.



As stimulating as I'm sure it might be to debate the semantics of the word "if", I think I can save us both a lot of time by backing up and pointing you to something which you ignored twice already:

1 Corinthians 14

This chapter clearly establishes for us that legitimate gifts of tongues are not always that which will be understood by the immediate hearers.
In fact, the only way to understand those legitimate gifts of tongues is to use the gift of interpretation by the Holy Spirit.

So at this point, since 1 Corinthians 14 already disproves your point, it becomes superfluous to try and debate whether or not 1 Corinthians 13:1 refers to heavenly tongues or not because we've already established from other scripture that non-understandable tongues do exist and are legitimate manifestations of the Holy Spirit.

What a bunch of baloney.

I gave you example of Bible verses showing the same magic that the surrounding nations used.

Runes/reading stones, magic wands from tree branches, magic curses, Joseph scrying and calling himself a sorcerer, etc.

The definition of magic does not change just because they use your God's name instead of another. That the "other's" magic is "lying signs and wonders," is merely a one-sided opinion.

Here is the last paragraph from a post on Hebrew magic, from one of our Jewish members. Perhaps he can give us more info, or repost the whole post. Levite? Highlighting mine. I hope he comes in and posts both of his works on Hebrew Magic.

"But of course, even with all these prohibitions-- most of which are probably rooted in the common usage of such magic by idolators (hence the passage in Deuteronomy beginning with a command not to "pass one's children through fire," by which is meant to offer them as sacrifices to the god Molech, as was done in various parts of the Ancient Near East)-- there are still many kinds of magic, even many kinds of divination, which are not forbidden. The Rabbis of the Talmud employ any number of kinds of magic, and there are several fascinating sections scattered through the Talmud describing both their magical adventures and their refinements of what magics are and are not prohibited and under what circumstances." - Levite

*
You are being ridiculous on the - aggelos. Obviously I'm not confused," since I gave the actual definition, and a verse using it as human messenger. I showed that it does not have to mean angel. It can also be a human messenger, pastor, etc.

*
As to tongues, - you ignore that churches are turning away from the spiritual language interpretation.

*

 

[Rise]

I gave you example of Bible verses showing the same magic that the surrounding nations used.

You never defined what magic is. Part of that definition is defining how it operates.
You cannot work through the power or influence of demons and claim to be working through the power and influence of the Spirit of God. Those two things are mutually exclusive.

The Bible clearly defines there is a difference between working by the power of God versus the power of satan. You have not made any attempt to directly dispute the fact that the Bible says that.

You are being ridiculous on the - aggelos. Obviously I'm not confused," since I gave the actual definition, and a verse using it as human messenger. I showed that it does not have to mean angel. It can also be a human messenger, pastor, etc.

You're confused then, because I never said it can't refer to a human messenger.
However, in most cases of the NT, the context shows it is referring to a heavenly messenger.

As to tongues, - you ignore that churches are turning away from the spiritual language interpretation.

You're ignoring what the Bible says. 1 Corinthians 14.
We don't determine what is true based on what a particular church believes. We go to the source and see what God's word says.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hear this. Possibly none of the previous posters (other than me) understands the passages about speaking in tongues, because perhaps my gift is in understanding mysteries. As you should know from reading the epistles, there are those with the gift of understanding mysteries and a verse says someone who speaks in tongues speaks mysteries unto God. The concept of mysteries is all over the place in the NT, so lets not be surprised about that. Suppose that I were to speak those mysteries to you, a dedicated person, a converted person, then you might understand them. Ergo mysteries would be given to you, although before that you would not be able to understand. They would be foreign to you. They would go right over your head, somewhat like someone who doesn't know how to read the Bible -- no exactly like that. Ergo you should consider that tongues may not be foreign languages at all but the mysteries of God, which are secrets from the uninitiated. In Acts 2 they are called the praises of the LORD which the various Jews are hearing in their own native languages. Ergo...speaking in gobbledygook is not needed today, but speaking the mysteries, the praises of the LORD is and which tongues are -- most likely.

 

[Rise]

Hear this. Possibly none of the previous posters (other than me) understands the passages about speaking in tongues, because perhaps my gift is in understanding mysteries. As you should know from reading the epistles, there are those with the gift of understanding mysteries and a verse says someone who speaks in tongues speaks mysteries unto God. The concept of mysteries is all over the place in the NT, so lets not be surprised about that. Suppose that I were to speak those mysteries to you, a dedicated person, a converted person, then you might understand them. Ergo mysteries would be given to you, although before that you would not be able to understand. They would be foreign to you. They would go right over your head, somewhat like someone who doesn't know how to read the Bible -- no exactly like that. Ergo you should consider that tongues may not be foreign languages at all but the mysteries of God, which are secrets from the uninitiated. In Acts 2 they are called the praises of the LORD which the various Jews are hearing in their own native languages. Ergo...speaking in gobbledygook is not needed today, but speaking the mysteries, the praises of the LORD is and which tongues are -- most likely.

Am I correct in understanding that you think tongues is speaking a language people can understand, but that the content of that message is just too deep and complex for them to grasp?

There are a few problems with that theory based on 1 Corinthians 14:.
1. If tongues was speaking understandable words, then you would be speaking the word of God (which is the definition of prophecy). Because Paul said that tongues, once interpretted, becomes prophecy; this would force us to define prophecy as not just speaking the word of God, but speaking the word of God in a dumbed down enough way that people can comprehend it. There's no Biblical support for defining prophecy that way.
2. 1 Corinthians 14:8-9, Paul uses analogies that deal with tone and distinction. Meaning aural understanding. He doesn't use analogies that deal with conceptual understanding, like parables. Again in 1 Corinthians 14:10-11 he's dealing with "languages that have meaning". He's not talking about sayings that are too confusing to be understood.
3. 1 Corinthians 14:13 also makes it clear that it is possible for someone to speak a tongue they themselves cannot understand. This makes it more difficult to claim that they are speaking mysteries that they have the gift to conceptually comprehend, but others don't.

 

[Brickjectivity]

There are a few problems with that theory based on 1 Corinthians 14:.
1. If tongues was speaking understandable words, then you would be speaking the word of God (which is the definition of prophecy). Because Paul said that tongues, once interpretted, becomes prophecy; this would force us to define prophecy as not just speaking the word of God, but speaking the word of God in a dumbed down enough way that people can comprehend it. There's no Biblical support for defining prophecy that way.
2. 1 Corinthians 14:8-9, Paul uses analogies that deal with tone and distinction. Meaning aural understanding. He doesn't use analogies that deal with conceptual understanding, like parables. Again in 1 Corinthians 14:10-11 he's dealing with "languages that have meaning". He's not talking about sayings that are too confusing to be understood.
3. 1 Corinthians 14:13 also makes it clear that it is possible for someone to speak a tongue they themselves cannot understand. This makes it more difficult to claim that they are speaking mysteries that they have the gift to conceptually comprehend, but others don't.

All of this is easily accounted for by saying tongues are mysteries being spoken which pass over the heads of some. It isn't difficult in my opinion to view those passages this way. Both the glossalalia and the pure natural language interpretations are strained, although I prefer the second to the first.

 

[Rise]

All of this is easily accounted for by saying tongues are mysteries being spoken which pass over the heads of some. It isn't difficult in my opinion to view those passages this way. Both the glossalalia and the pure natural language interpretations are strained, although I prefer the second to the first.

Your interpretation is not consistent with 1 Corinthians 14:8-11, as I already pointed out. That is the a very clear strike against your attempt to read this as understandable language that just conceptually goes over the heads of the listeners.
You would not only need to reconcile those passages with your theory, but based on 1 Corinthians 14:5 you would also need to find any support in scripture that would suggest prophecy should not be defined as speaking the word of God, but speaking only the words of God which people can conceptually grasp. There's no basis for such a definition in scripture. In fact, scripture will prove you wrong with much of prophesy being given in visions and symbolism that requires interpretation.

Additionally; I can further add that your interptation is not consistent with Acts 2. Here we clearly see that tongues is defined as the function of speaking in a foreign language you don't know or understand, but which the hearers do.
The people were not amazed that they could understand something that would otherwise be theologically too complex for them to grasp - they were amazed that these unlearned fishermen were speaking in their native languages.

 

[Ingledsva]

As simple as I made the question for you, you still managed to not answer it.

I did not ask you to give reasons why you think what the Bible clearly says was probably altered or changed.

I asked you, that if the Bible clearly says "God created the sky and made it blue" multiple times, and that fact is contradicted no where else in the Bible, can we positively state that the Bible factually says "God created the sky and made it blue"?

I'll give you one more try at answering that.

Unless you are fluent in the Biblical languages and nuances - NO! - you can't say that.

Nor would the Bible repeating something automatically make it factual.

Nor is it "probably" altered. It does have changes. I have given many examples.

For instance Psalms 22:17 is being mistranslated as a prophecy of Jesus. -

Psa 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

When in reality -

"... The Psalm describes the angst of the psalmist (I think David) who is surrounded by enemies and asks why G-d has forsaken him. Psalms 22:16, which in Hebrew says "k'ari b'yadai v'raglai" ("Like a lion (the enemies) are at my hands and feet"). The disputed word here is "k'ari" which is spelled kaph - aleph - resh - yud. Most graduates of a Hebrew school education know that an ari is a lion, and that the use of the letter "kaph" before a word means "like" or "as." The Christians appear to have invented a new Hebrew word which they pronounce "koari" yet no such word exists in Hebrew with the same spelling. ..." http://judaism.about.com/od/jewishviewofjesus/a/jesus_psalms.htm

Christians claim that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus, as the "suffering servant."

In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun.

Isaiah 7:14 is not about Jesus and has - (alma) young woman, - not virgin.

And the sky is not actually blue.

Simplified - Sunlight hits our atmosphere. The dense atmosphere with it's gasses, etc., absorbs, reflects, and diffuses light into the different spectrum colors we perceive.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

You never defined what magic is. Part of that definition is defining how it operates.
You cannot work through the power or influence of demons and claim to be working through the power and influence of the Spirit of God. Those two things are mutually exclusive.

The Bible clearly defines there is a difference between working by the power of God versus the power of satan. You have not made any attempt to directly dispute the fact that the Bible says that. ....

LOL! I showed what magic was using the text.

You, - as I said, - thinking that because the magic is in YOUR God's name, - it somehow doesn't make it magic, - but the exact same thing under another God's name is different and evil, is highly amusing.

Your, and your church's opinion of their magic, as apposed to the other religion's magic, is merely an opinion.

*

 

[Rise]

@Ingledsva

Does the text of the Bible make a distinction between true vs false miracles, demonic power vs God's power, or does it not?

 

[Ingledsva]

@Ingledsva

Does the text of the Bible make a distinction between true vs false miracles, demonic power vs God's power, or does it not?

Again - it doesn't matter if your religion thinks it's magic is not magic but something else, and all other religions doing the same thing are doing evil magic.

Your religion does not define for anyone else - what magic is. If you both do the same things - you both do magic.

Apparently you didn't read this -

"But of course, even with all these prohibitions-- most of which are probably rooted in the common usage of such magic by idolators (hence the passage in Deuteronomy beginning with a command not to "pass one's children through fire," by which is meant to offer them as sacrifices to the god Molech, as was done in various parts of the Ancient Near East)-- there are still many kinds of magic, even many kinds of divination, which are not forbidden. The Rabbis of the Talmud employ any number of kinds of magic, and there are several fascinating sections scattered through the Talmud describing both their magical adventures and their refinements of what magics are and are not prohibited and under what circumstances." - Levite

Check out this list.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/search?utf8=✓&keywords=magic&commit=search

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incantation_bowl Scroll down to Judaism and Christianity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_magical_papyri

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/magic-bowls/

*

 

[Ingledsva]

You never defined what magic is. Part of that definition is defining how it operates.
You cannot work through the power or influence of demons and claim to be working through the power and influence of the Spirit of God. Those two things are mutually exclusive.

The Bible clearly defines there is a difference between working by the power of God versus the power of satan. You have not made any attempt to directly dispute the fact that the Bible says that....

LOL! Round and round.

The other religions also claim their magic is from their Gods.

Hebrew/Christians are no different then them when doing magic. You just believe it is different, - anthropologists don't.

Your religion does not determine what magic is.

We have a long history of world magic, and the Hebrew were no different.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/magic

1 a : the use of means (as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces b : magic rites or incantations. 2 a : an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source b : something that seems to cast a spell : enchantment.

*