Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Tongues, madness or sign for unbeliever | 1 Cor 14:22 | NYP | 151157 | ||
I would like to take some time to ponder your questions. However, I would like to address the later part now. Please forgive me, but I have never been good at memorizing or remembering where a particular passage is. Thank God for e-Sword. I have to look up each passage as I remember it. Sometimes this is very hard, since I have used the NIV for many years and e-Sword does not support it yet. Personally, when I think of the word "tongues," be it plural or other wise, I think of it as "unknown tongues." A language no man can understand without the gift of interpretation. Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 1 Co 12 specifically spells out the fact that “speaking in different kinds of tongues” is a gift, as is the interpretation of tongues, as well as at least 7 other gifts of the Spirit. Different kinds of tongues, I believe refers occasionally, but not specifically to known languages, but what to man, is an unknown tongue or language. I am pleased to note that though I have never studied this particular topic in this commentary, I just discovered that VINCENT'S WORD STUDIES spells out my thoughts in nearly my own words. III. Recorded Facts in the New Testament. (1.) The first recorded bestowment of the gift was at Pentecost (Acts 2). The question arises whether the speakers were miraculously endowed to speak with other tongues, or whether the Spirit interpreted the apostle's words to each in his own tongue. Probably the latter was the case, since there is no subsequent notice of the apostles preaching in foreign tongues; there is no allusion to foreign tongues by Peter, nor by Joel, whom he quotes. This fact, moreover, would go to explain the opposite effects on the hearers. (2.) Under the power of the Spirit, the company addressed by Peter in the house of Cornelius at Caesarea spake with tongues. Act_10:44-46. (3.) Certain disciples at Ephesus, who received the Holy Spirit in the laying on of Paul's hands, spake with tongues and prophesied, Act_19:6. IV. Meaning of the Term “Tongue.” The various explanations are: the tongue alone, inarticulately: rare, provincial, poetic, or archaic words: language or dialect. The last is the correct definition. It does not necessarily mean any of the known languages of men, but may mean the speaker's own tongue, shaped in a peculiar manner by the Spirit's influence; or an entirely new spiritual language. Your Brother In Christ NYP |
||||||
2 | Tongues, madness or sign for unbeliever | 1 Cor 14:22 | Hank | 151164 | ||
NYP, take as much time as you wish, brother. I had a boss once who said that it's much better to get it right than get it fast :-) By the way, do you have or can you get access to [John] MacArthur's Study Bible? Dr. MacArthur does a good job of exegesis of the "spiritual gifts" passages of 1 Corinthians 12:1 - 14:40. His note on the "with other tongues" of Acts 2:4 is fairly brief and I will reproduce it here: "with other tongues ... Known languages...not ecstatic utterances. These languages given by the Spirit were a sign of judgment to unbelieving Israel. They also showed that from then on God's people would come from all nations, and marked the transition from Israel to the church. Tongues speaking occurs only twice more in Acts (10:46 and 19:6." --Hank | ||||||
3 | Tongues, madness or sign for unbeliever | 1 Cor 14:22 | NYP | 151279 | ||
That is one that I don't have Hank, but I do believe that note "almost" hits the nail on the head. No doubt tongues could, at times be "Known languages," but I believe that in the book of Acts, they were "ecstatic utterances." How else could one have understood in his own language what was being spoken by one who did not speak his language, while at the same time, another who spoke a third language understood what was being spoken as well? No doubt there are rational explinations for much of what is spiritual, but my question is, "why must the fact that there is the supernatural, which has no natural or rational explination, constantly be denied?" |
||||||
4 | Tongues, madness or sign for unbeliever | 1 Cor 14:22 | Hank | 151281 | ||
NYP: Please see my Post 151280 which I entered just minutes ago in response to a post by Morant61 (Tim Moran). Perhaps it will help to answer at least to a small degree some of the questions you have posed. --Hank | ||||||
5 | Tongues, madness or sign for unbeliever | 1 Cor 14:22 | NYP | 151375 | ||
Well Dear Hank, I don't know how to figure the Post number out, but my response to Doc, dated Thu 05/26/05, 9:50pm, is the culmination of my studies, and my firm belief concerning this topic. As is stated, the Apostles, all of them (and I state “Apostles” taking into consideration the context immediately prior to, and after Acts2:1-4) were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. How anyone could consider this a “miracle of hearing” rather than what scripture states, which was “…and they began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them,” which is better described as Devine utterance, is beyond me. Where in scripture has the Spirit ever come upon sinners? How else, but by the Spirit, could there have been such a miracle as one of hearing? There is no mention of any “miracle of hearing” being bestowed on the sinners at Pentecost. The only mention of anything resembling a miracle that I can see, is the enablement of the Spirit. Again, Dear Brother, my thoughts are well depicted in my note to Doc dated 05/26/05, 9:50pm. Your servant NYP |
||||||