Originally posted by checkbaiterThe distinction you appear to be making between yourself and traditional xtians does't paint you verry well in light of I Corinthians 14:20 "in thinking be mature." Also the passages you cite, especially when you get beyond verse 5, make abundantly clear that tongues must have an interpretation, or be uttered in silence (a private prayer to God).
Well not according to the bible. We are commanded to SIT in our private prayer life, and where you will find me in opposition to traditional Xtians is that the same person that SIT does the interpretation. Traditional Xtians believe some one else interprets, but that is neither here nor there for our discussion.
1 Cor 14:5
5I wish you all spo ...[text shortened]... but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
(NKJ)
Chapter 14 as a whole is clear: all these gifts are for the edification of the church. Interpretations of individual verses wrenched out of that context twist the Scriptures. Please also bear in mind that the verse numbers are arbitrary; the Apostle Paul wrote letters that were not fragmented into verses, or even into chapters. He generally held one idea through a long segment. I Corinthians is one of his more complex epistles, and it has produced considerable controversy and sectarian division as "believers" attempt to read the letter in segments, rather than as a whole unit, written to a specific group of churches for a specific purpose.
The passages that you cite clarify and endorse my contention, except for my quip about eternal fire, which is unbiblical, as are most images of devils and hell propagated by "believers."
Originally posted by Wulebgrwhen you get beyond verse 5, make abundantly clear that tongues must have an interpretation, or be uttered in silence (a private prayer to God)
The distinction you appear to be making between yourself and traditional xtians does't paint you verry well in light of I Corinthians 14:20 "in thinking be mature." Also the passages you cite, especially when you get beyond verse 5, make abundantly clear that tongues must have an interpretation, or be uttered in silence (a private prayer to God).
Chap ...[text shortened]... al fire, which is unbiblical, as are most images of devils and hell propagated by "believers."
Yes, when gathered together it must be accompanied by interp.
Chapter 14 as a whole is clear: all these gifts are for the edification of the church. Interpretations of individual verses wrenched out of that context twist the Scriptures.
?????
Please also bear in mind that the verse numbers are arbitrary; the Apostle Paul wrote letters that were not fragmented into verses, or even into chapters. He generally held one idea through a long segment. I Corinthians is one of his more complex epistles, and it has produced considerable controversy and sectarian division as "believers" attempt to read the letter in segments, rather than as a whole unit, written to a specific group of churches for a specific purpose.
also, words were run together, such as FORGODSOLOVEDTHEWORLD...
except for my quip about eternal fire, which is unbiblical, as are most images of devils and hell propagated by "believers."
We are in total agreement here. I don't believe the bible teaches "eternal punishment" either.
To make my point would require extensive bible translation and many more verses to show contradictions in going along with traditional Xtian teaching....for this I will refer you to here if you are really interested....
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=579
Originally posted by WulebgrI overlooked the rest of your question....LOL...no, actually the manefestation is real and the incoherent language we would only hope would stop.😛
Serious question: If a Christian has the gift of speaking in tongues, but cannot construct a coherent sentence in his or her native language, is the gift false?
Originally posted by checkbaiterTempting God? God supposedly says - if believer drinks poison, then believer will not be harmed. It would help unbelievers find God if believers would show that what God said was true and it helps keep believers from finding God if they refuse to show that what the Bible says was true. What is all this talk about tempting God? God says - if X, then Y. It's natural that believers should believe this and nonbelievers or skeptics to want to test this. This is how God designed us, no? If God says something easily testable, humans will want to test it. If God refuses to allow it to be tested he's going out of his way to keep people from believing.
I speak in tongues, and have been present on the prayer end while a demon was cast out. The rest is in the context of "if". A believer does not go out and drink poison, as this would be "tempting' God.
Here's my quick 5c worth. - Haven't read the entire thread, though only up to page 4.
I am taking AkY's question seriously, not provocatively.
Yes, I can vouch for 3 out of 5. I have driven out demons, speak in other tonguers and prayed for sick that got healed.
Whether the text is to be taken as part of the Bible is not really relevant - it is clear that it was NOT in the most ancient manuscripts but certainly written (later) and vbelieved by the early church.
Taken together with other texts (such as Thou shalt not tempt the Lord the God) it is also clear that it describes occurences in retrospect, this is not to be taken as a proff that anybody is Christian.
After posting this urgently this morning - before checking for spelling! - I thought of some other aspects of this matter.
Whether AkY meant this as serious or not, being able to identify who is and who is not a Christian is a valid question. And I agree with most of the things Kelly J and C58 wrote.
I suggest Mark 16 is not the key criterion. This merely describes some things that might happen in the slipstream of a Christian. However, some other religions and cults also claim to be able to heal the sick, speak in tongues, etc.
IMHO the key criterion was given by Jesus himself to his disciples: By THIS shall all men know if you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.
This is the lithmus test which non-Christians can and should use in assessing the validity of someone's claim. After all, another reminder by Jesus to all and sundry is: By their FRUITS you will know them. In other words, not by their eloquence on the RHP BB!
In peace,
CJ
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesNicely tongued into your cheek, there, Scribbles! 😀
Would it be possible for you to post in tongues, or is it strictly a vocal phenomenon?
🙄 This ranting glut of navel-gazing makes about as much sense as SIT...
I think I hear the walrus calling my name ~ Goo-goo-ga-joob 😕
Originally posted by widgetI'm serious. I'll go out on a limb and say that the audiences of those who speak in tongues are most likely completely unfamiliar with world languages and wouldn't be able to discern whether the speaker was actually speaking in a human language or just mumbling. A phonetic transcription would be insightful to learning more about this phenomenon.
Nicely tongued into your cheek, there, Scribbles! 😀
🙄 This ranting glut of navel-gazing makes about as much sense as SIT...
I think I hear the walrus calling my name ~ Goo-goo-ga-joob 😕
Additionally, it is well known that language is a mental phenomenon that manifests itself in physical ways aside from the tongue, such as sign language. If the phenomenon is a linguistic one, one should be able to observe it in non-vocal ways, such as writing, or even in deaf people who sign in tongues. If it is only observed vocally, it suggests that it is largely a hypnotic, rather than linguistic, phenomenon.