Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | EdB | 10826 | ||
Richlou Let us use standard hermenuetics here and see what we come up. The Corinthians had overestimated the importance the gift of tongues in public worship. They were speaking in tongues without interpretation and Paul was bringing correction. An outline of the this chapter would be: 1 Prophecy edifies the church more than interpreted tongues. vv.1-4 2. Prophecy and tongues with interpretation are equally important to the church. v5 3. Speaking in tongues in public worship services without interpretation is of no benefit to others vv.6-12 4. Those who speak or pray in tongues in church should seek to edify the church by praying for the gift of interpretation. V 13 5. In Paul’s personal life speaking in tongues to God is an important means of worship and spiritual growth. vv. 14-19 6. Prophecy is more useful than uninterpreted tongues because prophecy brings conviction of sin and the knowledge of God’s presence. vv.20-25 7. Speaking in tongues and prophesying must be regulated so that order in maintained in the church. vv.26-40 Outline from Full Life Study Bible Publisher Zondervan Pg 1774. Verse 2 which we seem to have the most trouble with could be taken two ways. 1 Some believe that this verse indicates that the principal use of tongues, whether in the church or in private, is to speak primarily to God and not to humans. I disagree. 2 On the other hand Paul’s statement may mean that only God understands a tongue unless it is interpreted (v. 5). The implication would be that tongues, spoken about here is a prayer language. Verse 15 is a cap stone in this discussion. Paul is referring to his own experience, to his own private use of tongues directed to God. Paul used tongues not only for praying , but also for singing, praising, and giving thanks to God. Verse 18 Again the reason for this passage is correction Paul is saying he would rather speak five intelligible words than ten thousand no one knows what he is saying. But notice he did thank God for the ability to speak in tongues or those unintelligible words. Dr. John MacArthur explanation of this passage tips on the use of singular tongues and plural tongues. He bases his argument that when Paul used singular he was talking about gibberish and when Paul used the plural form he was talking about languages of man. I respectfully disagree with Dr MacArthur. I believe when Paul used the singular form he was in fact talking the language of Angels, of which there is only one, as the text states and when he used the plural he was talking of the tongues of men of which there are many. Whether Dr MacArthur be right and I be wrong or vice versa there is no way to get to the meaning of the text you came up with. |
||||||
2 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10834 | ||
My friend, there is a huge difference between applying the rules of hermeneutics and the outline of a letter. Sorry! | ||||||
3 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | EdB | 10858 | ||
I used that outline in an attempt to simplify that which to me you made complicated. Also since I suspected you were using outside sources I thought you would like to see I also was not standing alone in my thoughts on this subject. Your explanation might fly if Paul had only written chapter 14, but Paul also had written chapter 12 and 13. You hypothesis that Paul was using rhetorical questions and making allusions would stand were it not for verse 1 chapter 13, verse 10 chapter 12 and verse 15 chapter 14. You constructed your point on the theory that Paul was teaching that speaking in an unknown language was wrong. Ignoring the fact that Paul was teaching, that speaking in tongue of men was for public usage and speaking in tongues of angels in for private. You ignored Paul’s repeated reference of the two uses of tongues and the two forms of tongues therefore your construction starts to crumble. You tried to centralize your argument by saying Paul was using a rabbinical form of teaching and your right about his training, but most scholars agree Paul’s method of delivery was without that annoying, ‘saying much but never getting to the point’ method of teaching the Pharisees so loved. Paul spoke very bluntly here when he was bringing correction he did not want to be misunderstood. He was a master in making point and then using complementary terms to prove that point. He established truth and built upon it. Sure Paul used rhetorical questions, and asked questions that made the false appear ridiculous. However we never see Paul state a truth and then tear it down rhetorically or otherwise in an attempt to reinforce the original truth. And that is basically what your saying he was doing by your interpretation of this passage. That convinces me you do not have the correct understanding of it. I may not be hundred percent correct myself (that is why I still study this passage), but I see my position as far more defendable than the one you presented. I’m sorry if that offends you I meant no offense. |
||||||
4 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10926 | ||
Ok, my friend, let us study more on our own side. In Heaven we will try to find Paul...LOL | ||||||
5 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | EdB | 10965 | ||
Bravo! You are truly a scholar and a gentleman. It was a pleasure to discuss this with you and I hope soon to explore another equally interesting issue with you. Thanks for your kindness, your genuine interest, and thanks most of all for your patience in teaching me your point of view. I know I grew from this and I hope you benefited also. I look forward to your offer to look up Paul and get it from him first hand. Be blessed and be a blessing Listening for the trumpet! Ed |
||||||