Tongues Part 1
Top Comments
All Comments (25)
-
Good Sir, My comment was not an opinion but a fact. I don't say that in a proud manner, but if you wish to take issue with someone, try with those who make more scathing remarks.
As for myself, I am in no way condemning anyone, and will continue to ponder this and other scriptural matters for clarity and understanding. Good Day
-
bigfredNC: I will check video 2 to see if you breakdown 1Cor.14:2 etc. BUT so far you have only attempted to drag the listeners into siding against the argument from Christians *WITHOUT breaking down 1Cor.14:2!
1Cor.14:2 in the next clip will you again try to have us lean upon OPINION or will you lean on the argument of what is written AFTER rightly divided...
By the way who was YHWH talking about in Isa.28:11-12? i.e. even that Paul brought up in 1Cor.14:21?!?!?
(sigh)......
-
suaved: You can't even show me one bible verse where it is saying that Tongues are exclusive to human languages only!
I can show you verses where there are TONGUES that are UNKNOWN to the human dialect & human mind & supernatural (naturally unacquired)...
Plus you guys exclude the Gifts of interpretation of Tongues, but only bcuz you guys have NEVER received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, so you try to demonize believers who speak in tongues & this alone is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit!
-
Soulja4Alethia: How do you know if they are speaking a real language? You just listed 4 languages *ONLY yet there is at least 6,800 different languages around the world today & this is not counting the loss languages...
This is just for the sake of the earthly language argument...Not alone when we are dealing with the "unknown" tongue...1Cor.14:2 etc.
Yall be quick to scream it's gibberish etc. have you not defined "strange tongue" in Isa.28:11 which Paul ref. in 1Cor.14:21?
REPENT!
-
Pt.2-farblosaludiert: People try to say Tongues was only for the Apostles when this is a LIE! First off it was initially the Baptism of the Holy Spirit that was given in Acts 2:4 (Acts 1:5 & Mt.3:11) & the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was always given with a sign/evidence of Tongues (except Acts 8:12-17 though what SIGN Simon saw is debated also)...
15 different interpretations were NOT given when Peter spoke from Acts 2:14-37so what happened? THEY *HEARD in their own tongue!
SHAMA-H8085
-
Pt.1-farblosaludiert: I always tell ppl that the word "unknown" though italicized in the KJV it was put there for a reason.
How about you or any other person that brings this up tell us what word should be there? How do ANY of the verses where unknown is mentioned make ANY sense without the word "unknown" being there!
Also people lie against the fact that there was a common language between the believers in Acts 2:6-12
Peter did *not PREACH 15 different messages in Acts 2:14-37
-
With all due respect to the speaker, the word "unknown" when referring to tongues is found in the King James translation. However, it is added in (= italicized), but you will not find it in the Greek and many other translations. This is the starting point for much confusion about this subject.
-
weren't tongues given to the apostles so they could go out and minister to nations whose language they didn't speak in their own culture? God understands you in your own language, He doesn't need you to speak in some 'divine' tongue to understand you... these preachers spit out gibberish in church to sound like the Spirit has welled up in them and no one knows what they are saying at all. Why don't we ever hear them speak a real language? Like Spanish? Japanese? Swahili? Arabic? Nothing...
Amen BigFredNC
The term UNKNOWN added by KJV TRANSLATORS & SHOULDN'T BE THERE
FT = False Tongues
FT = Topeka Kansas ZIP CODE bgins with 666. Topeka = TORNADOES The MIGHTY WIND FT claim isnt from GOD but a TORNADO from SATAN
FT CANT b TESTED. GOD = test spirits r of God or Satan = you cant test FT = FT talkers could be CURSING GOD & not know it
FT = Mass Confusion = BABYLON
tonguesRfalse 4 years ago 3
Good post. You are exactly right. When ministers in the pulpit start spewing tongues (or their "version" of tongues), there is no interpretation whatsover. Paul tells us that when tongues are spoken, they should be interpreted. Otherwise, we are simply speaking into the air.
Tongues are REAL, human languages. Also, if everyone in the congregation speaks the same language, then what is the point of speaking in tongues?
suaved 2 years ago 2