ECT WHY GLOSSA /TONGUES ARE NOT FOR TODAY !!

[God's Truth]

You do not know all tongues speakers, so your claim is falsehood.

Paul said not to forbid speaking in tongues.

Can't you reason this out? Paul was speaking of tongues WHEN IT WAS REAL.

I suspect you dislike tongues speaking because you are very self willed.

You like to control everything others believe and you have never been filled with the Holy Spirit as the early church was.

LA

All you are doing is trying to insult. What else do you got?

 

[God's Truth]

I am 70 years old in two weeks - baptised when I was 12, waaaaaay back in 1957. I have been a Christian longer than many of you all have been alive, and the observations, above, were true for me.

Indeed, I was afraid to "let go" in a worship service, sang with my hands in my pockets, fought back tears, and did my best to get out of the worship service without "making a fool out of myself." I am biker type but without the tattoos (I ride a vtx 1800 - and I ride year round - back to Sturgis, Denver, Seattle, San Diego etc, all from near-Fresno, California).

Without asking for it, I was filled with the Spirit back in 1997, as I was driving away for a very typical church service, in my Camaro. As I left the building and drove down a very long driveway out to the frontage road, I was completely overcome with emotion, uncontrollable emotion, and had to pull over immediately. The event lasted about 20 minutes and I was very much aware that "this is from God." No tongues, only tears that did not come from me. I mean, I was very unemotional when I got in my car to drive away from "morning worship," so it was not an emotionally caused experience. It just happened "out of the blue." And when it was over, I was left with this realization: "This is what it means to be filled with the Spirit." My uncontrollable tears were like a glass being filled to overflowing. A one time experience, but wonderful and unforgettable. It was God kicking my butt on the "surrender" issue. When I compare my experience with others, the description of our "events" are PRECISELY the same, except for the fact that I did not speak in tongues.

I will leave that with you. Know this: none of this was from Satan. How do I know? Many reasons, but this is the most profound, I think: My life, since that experience, has not served the "cause of Satan" at all. Of course, I remain a sinner, but my commitment to the Lord unwavering and undeniable.

Why do you say you are still a sinner?

We are not to remain sinners.

 

[God's Truth]

You should not confuse Acts 2 with what Paul is talking about in the Corinthian letter. They are not the same.

They are the same.

Think about it, rather than being reactionary.

I have studied this intently years ago. God revealed His Truth to me about tongues. I have been explaining the Truth carefully to you.

In Acts two, is there any hint of the need for interpreters? No. Each man (as in "every" man) heard what was being preached in their own language. Did anyone think the Apostles were mad men, talking in tongues without an interpreter? No. What was edified, the mind or the spirit? The mind.

You are wrong. There were people there who thought they had too much wine.

Acts 2:13 Some, however, made fun of them and said, "They have had too much wine."

All of these considerations, have an opposite answer to them, if reading the Corinthian discussion of tongues.

Look, I used to believe exactly as you do. I ministered in Churches of Christ for 14 years, before leaving that fellowship. I worship with a very open minded, loving, Baptist church, now (and there are many such churches that do not fit this "loving" description). During my sojourn, after leaving the C of C . I worshiped with "charismatic" churches for ten years, and married my tongue speaking wife (didn't know she had this gift, at the time). I am ashamed to say that I preached the very things you believe, believing I was right.

It makes no difference really. God's Truth is the only thing that matters. I thought I was speaking tongues for a time, I even interpreted what I was saying. The Holy Spirit laid it on my heart that I never studied it from God's written Word; I only did what man taught me about it.

I have attended many services in which tongues were featured, and, in those churches, the problems they have with with tongues are the very same problems the Corinthian church had. If the problems are the same, if Paul's comments and cautions work in the Charismatic Churches of today, why should any of conclude that the actual "tongues" event is different.

I still do not know what that first century experience was like, but I know the Pauline cautions work for all of "charismata," I know of these people's faith (keep in mind that I, myself, am not a tongues speaker) is as deeply felt as mine, they are as committed to the Lord as I am, if not more, and God blesses them in the very same way as he blesses me, in my Baptist-English speaking church. We serve the same Lord. And, since we are saved IN SPITE of ourselves, you included, all of us should be able to share in the fact that we are all prodigal sons of the Father.

Paul debated and argued with the Jews about Jesus being the Christ, and how to be saved.

I will gladly argue and debate with you on the truth about any doctrines, and even speaking in tongues.

May God's Truth keep us close to Him, and not false tongue speaking.

 

[jsjohnnt]

They are the same.




I have studied this intently years ago. God revealed His Truth to me about tongues. I have been explaining the Truth carefully to you.



You are wrong. There were people there who thought they had too much wine.

Acts 2:13 Some, however, made fun of them and said, "They have had too much wine."

It makes no difference really. God's Truth is the only thing that matters. I thought I was speaking tongues for a time, I even interpreted what I was saying. The Holy Spirit laid it on my heart that I never studied it from God's written Word; I only did what man taught me about it.


Paul debated and argued with the Jews about Jesus being the Christ, and how to be saved.

I will gladly argue and debate with you on the truth about any doctrines, and even speaking in tongues.

May God's Truth keep us close to Him, and not false tongue speaking.

So verses 7 - 11 (Acts 2:7-11) mean nothing to you?

Acts 2:7-11
7 Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs--we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!"

This did not happen in Corinth and, for that reason, we can safely believe and teach that the the Pentecost tongues were not the same as the Corinthian event and, especially, Paul's use of tongues -- a personal event, in his life, in which he did not understand what he saying, but felt the benefit in his spirit . . . . his words.

Clearly drunkedness is not "madness." Also, could it be that the claim of "drunkedness" was uttered by those whose dialect was not being preach, as the time they made their conclusion? I mean, there is no "gibberish" going on here, but, by your defnition, it was gibberish in Corinth.

 

[Puppet]

The Bible clearly teaches that the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues always refers to real, known human languages.

 

[God's Truth]

So verses 7 - 11 (Acts 2:7-11) mean nothing to you?

Acts 2:7-11
7 Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs--we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!"

This did not happen in Corinth and, for that reason, we can safely believe and teach that the the Pentecost tongues were not the same as the Corinthian event and, especially, Paul's use of tongues -- a personal event, in his life, in which he did not understand what he saying, but felt the benefit in his spirit . . . . his words.

Clearly drunkedness is not "madness." Also, could it be that the claim of "drunkedness" was uttered by those whose dialect was not being preach, as the time they made their conclusion? I mean, there is no "gibberish" going on here, but, by your defnition, it was gibberish in Corinth.

Your reasoning is greatly flawed. You are trying to make differences between drunkenness and madness.

The tongues are the same.

The nowadays tongue speaking is also commonly called a "prayer language.” Those practicing the false tongue speaking of nowadays, they believe they are speaking a prayer language, and that in this type of praying it is somehow deeper and more revealing about themselves to God, and more personal than praying with their native language with words they understand. However, that is not scriptural, and that even goes against the Word of God.

Calling the false tongue speaking a "prayer language" is from an error in understanding of the scriptures explaining speaking in tongues when no one is around who understands. It is important to realize that after the believers in the bible had the gift of speaking in tongues for the sign to the Jews...they kept the gift even when the Jews of other languages were not around. Therefore, the tongue speakers spoke only to God when they spoke in tongues they did not understand and when no Jews from other languages were there, because, God, of course, can understand all the earthly languages.

Again, if there were no one of other languages around to understand the tongue speaker, and if the tongue speaker themselves cannot interpret what they say, then they are speaking only to God, and this speaking edified (nurtures) only the tongue speakers themselves.

Tongue speaking edifies (nurtures) only the tongue speaker when no understands; they are edified in knowing that God gave them an amazing gift (the real tongues is an amazing gift). How edifying it is for oneself just to have a gift such as speaking in tongues; that alone is what edifies. It is a false edification when one is performing nonsense babbling.

Nowadays tongue speakers, while trying to copy cat the real tongue speaking as is in the Bible, they discount completely that if they do not interpret what they say, even when praying in tongues to God only...then their mind is fruitless. Surely, a fruitless mind is not something one should be aiming for in personal prayer times.

 

[jsjohnnt]

The Bible clearly teaches that the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues always refers to real, known human languages.

Pure D conjecture. It was a spiritual tongue that demanded a spiritual gift of interpretations to know what being said. Unless and until that happened, the gift of tongues was for spiritual benefit, only. You already have your biblical references.

Now, per Acts 2, you make a valid point, but not as to the Corinthian letter, and that is what I am talking about. It is that experience that is or could be the parallel to current tongue speaking events.

 

[jsjohnnt]

Your reasoning is greatly flawed. You are trying to make differences between drunkenness and madness.

The tongues are the same.

Nonsense, Drunkedness or not, the folks on Pentecost Day understood what was being said, in their own tongue and without an interpreter. Correct?

THAT is not the case in in Corinthians 14. Correct?

 

[jsjohnnt]

Your reasoning is greatly flawed. You are trying to make differences between drunkenness and madness.

The tongues are the same.
they kept the gift even when the Jews of other languages were not around. Therefore, the tongue speakers spoke only to God when they spoke in tongues they did not understand and when no Jews from other languages were there, because, God, of course, can understand all the earthly languages.

Tongue speaking edifies (nurtures) only the tongue speaker when no understands; they are edified in knowing that God gave them an amazing gift (the real tongues is an amazing gift). How edifying it is for oneself just to have a gift such as speaking in tongues; that alone is what edifies. It is a false edification when one is performing nonsense babbling.

Is this not, in part, what I am saying? At least you admit that the Corinthian experience is about spiritual edification when a gifted translation is presented. But more than this, in Acts 2, interpreters were not needed. In Corinthians 14, they were . . . . . . . and not simply "interpreters," but brothers or sisters who had the spiritual gift of interpretation. They didn't know the language, either, but were given the interpretation directly from God, as a gift.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

I am 70 years old in two weeks - baptised when I was 12, waaaaaay back in 1957. I have been a Christian longer than many of you all have been alive, and the observations, above, were true for me.

Indeed, I was afraid to "let go" in a worship service, sang with my hands in my pockets, fought back tears, and did my best to get out of the worship service without "making a fool out of myself." I am biker type but without the tattoos (I ride a vtx 1800 - and I ride year round - back to Sturgis, Denver, Seattle, San Diego etc, all from near-Fresno, California).

Without asking for it, I was filled with the Spirit back in 1997, as I was driving away for a very typical church service, in my Camaro. As I left the building and drove down a very long driveway out to the frontage road, I was completely overcome with emotion, uncontrollable emotion, and had to pull over immediately. The event lasted about 20 minutes and I was very much aware that "this is from God." No tongues, only tears that did not come from me. I mean, I was very unemotional when I got in my car to drive away from "morning worship," so it was not an emotionally caused experience. It just happened "out of the blue." And when it was over, I was left with this realization: "This is what it means to be filled with the Spirit." My uncontrollable tears were like a glass being filled to overflowing. A one time experience, but wonderful and unforgettable. It was God kicking my butt on the "surrender" issue. When I compare my experience with others, the description of our "events" are PRECISELY the same, except for the fact that I did not speak in tongues.

I will leave that with you. Know this: none of this was from Satan. How do I know? Many reasons, but this is the most profound, I think: My life, since that experience, has not served the "cause of Satan" at all. Of course, I remain a sinner, but my commitment to the Lord unwavering and undeniable.

Great.

One of my friends thought he was a Christian for about 40 years and had written books against this and that, but one day he was sitting in a meeting and the Holy Spirit came upon him and he said to the Lord, "what is happening, what are you doing" and the Lord said He was washing his sins away.

People can have all the knowledge of the Bible, but until they have a living experience then they remain just knowalls, full of pride, self willed.

LA

 

[God's Truth]

Nonsense, Drunkedness or not, the folks on Pentecost Day understood what was being said, in their own tongue and without an interpreter. Correct?

THAT is not the case in in Corinthians 14. Correct?

I have already explained this to you. I will explain it again.

Tongues were for a sign to the Jews.

Read what Paul says in CORINTHIANS. Remember, you keep insisting they are different tongues than the tongues in Acts.

1 Corinthians 14:21 In the Law it is written:

"Through men of strange tongues

and through the lips of foreigners

I will speak to this people,

but even then they will not listen to me," says the Lord.

22Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers.


Did you read that?

What is Paul speaking of when he says in the Law it is written?

This is what Paul is speaking about:

Isaiah 28:11 Very well then, with foreign lips

and strange tongues God will speak to this people,

12 to whom he said, "This is the resting place, let the weary rest";

and, "This is the place of repose"—

but they would not listen.



That is about the Jews.

Tongues are for a sign to the Jews.


That is proof that it is the same tongues in Corinthians as in Acts.

Since the biblical speaking in tongues were for a sign, and God gave the sign for the purpose as prophesied in the Old Testament, it would make sense to believe that speaking in tongues is a gift that would stop.

Tongues did not stop during the time Jesus Christ, the Apostles and Prophets were laying down the foundation because the Apostles were still writing the scriptures. Imagine if tongues had stopped in the people who had the gift, others would erroneously believe that God also took salvation away from them, since the Jews believed God accepted Gentiles as was evident by their speaking in words of God in different languages.

However, tongues have since ceased. Jesus, the prophets and the apostles have laid the foundation; the Bible is finished. New prophecies and new knowledge have ceased also, just as the Bible says they would, for you know you cannot add new prophecies and new knowledge to the Bible.

In Acts 2:5 we see that there were JEWS from EVERY NATION. The Jews are the people God said that He would speak to through men of strange tongues...

Acts 2:5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven.

In addition, in Acts 2:6 we see that the Jews from every nation spoke in many different languages...

Acts 2:6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language.

Just look at the list of places the Jews had come from...

Acts 2:8-Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs-we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!"

Please note that the word for languages is the name "tongues," see Acts 2:11.

God in His infinite wisdom knew that the Gentiles speaking in tongues would be a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles are also included in salvation. Can you imagine how necessary it was for the Jews to have the sign that salvation is for the Gentiles too? This is very important since the Jews called the Gentiles "unclean people." It was even against the law for Jews to associate closely with the Gentiles. See the following passage how God poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit even on the Gentiles, as was evident by the Gentiles speaking in tongues and praising God.

Acts 10:44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Calling the false tongue speaking a "prayer language" is from an error in understanding of the scriptures explaining speaking in tongues when no one is around who understands. It is important to realize that after the believers in the bible had the gift of speaking in tongues for the sign to the Jews...they kept the gift even when the Jews of other languages were not around. Therefore, the tongue speakers spoke only to God when they spoke in tongues they did not understand and when no Jews from other languages were there, because, God, of course, can understand all the earthly languages.

Again, if there were no one of other languages around to understand the tongue speaker, and if the tongue speaker themselves cannot interpret what they say, then they are speaking only to God, and this speaking edified (nurtures) only the tongue speakers themselves.

 

[God's Truth]

Is this not, in part, what I am saying? At least you admit that the Corinthian experience is about spiritual edification when a gifted translation is presented.

The real tongues were definitely.

Those speaking in tongues could declare the wonders of God (Acts 2:11). They could also praise God in tongues (Acts 10:46). Not everyone spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:5). If someone spoke in tongues, then they should pray that they should also interpret what they say, for the benefit of others (1 Corinthians 14:13). Even when praying and singing while speaking in tongues, the speaker, for himself also, should interpret what he is saying so that it is fruitful for his mind (1 Corinthians 14:14,15). If there is no interpreter in church, then the speaker should keep quiet and speak to himself and God (1 Corinthians 14:28).

But more than this, in Acts 2, interpreters were not needed.

Because the sign was to those there, the JEWS. The Jews from many different places and languages heard them speaking in their languages. They are the interpreters...they are hearing and understanding.

In Corinthians 14, they were . . . . . . . and not simply "interpreters," but brothers or sisters who had the spiritual gift of interpretation. They didn't know the language, either, but were given the interpretation directly from God, as a gift.

They were Gentile Corinthians with probably no Jews from other places around.

They didn't just lose the gift of tongues if no Jews from other cities and languages were around.

When no one from other languages were around, the tongue speaker should only speak if someone could interpret what was being said.

 

[Aimiel]

Great.

One of my friends thought he was a Christian for about 40 years and had written books against this and that, but one day he was sitting in a meeting and the Holy Spirit came upon him and he said to the Lord, "what is happening, what are you doing" and the Lord said He was washing his sins away.

People can have all the knowledge of the Bible, but until they have a living experience then they remain just knowalls, full of pride, self willed.

Amen! :thumb:

 

[jsjohnnt]

The real tongues were definitely.

Those speaking in tongues could declare the wonders of God (Acts 2:11). They could also praise God in tongues (Acts 10:46). Not everyone spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:5). If someone spoke in tongues, then they should pray that they should also interpret what they say, for the benefit of others (1 Corinthians 14:13). Even when praying and singing while speaking in tongues, the speaker, for himself also, should interpret what he is saying so that it is fruitful for his mind (1 Corinthians 14:14,15). If there is no interpreter in church, then the speaker should keep quiet and speak to himself and God (1 Corinthians 14:28).


Because the sign was to those there, the JEWS. The Jews from many different places and languages heard them speaking in their languages. They are the interpreters...they are hearing and understanding.



They were Gentile Corinthians with probably no Jews from other places around.

They didn't just lose the gift of tongues if no Jews from other cities and languages were around.

When no one from other languages were around, the tongue speaker should only speak if someone could interpret what was being said.

Acts 2, records an evangelistic event, in which God blessed the preachers and the listeners with understanding. The Apostles knew what they were preaching, and the listeners understood what was being said.

Again, In Corinth, the tongue speaker did NOT know what he was saying, nor did anyone listening. That makes Acts 2 and I Corinthians as different as day and night. Reread

You say that Acts two was a sign for the Jews. Fine. But I am telling you that the spiritual gifts were given to the Church, for use in the church, and not for evangelical purposes, per se. Besides, there was a strong Jewish presence in the Corinthian Church.

And in the church, tongues and interpretations were to be used simultaneously, as you point out. Paul is quite explicit, however, in I Cor 14:14, that with his prayer language ("If I pray in a tongue") , he did not know what he was saying. The event itself, before interpretations, was the blessing. Not so on the Day of Pentecost. Not at all.

I do not deny that tongues are misused, and, perhaps, often. But so too, was this gift misused in the First Church, as well.

The misuse of this gift does not prove that it is not of God. It only proves that the gifted are not being thoughtful in the use of their gifts. Nothing more. And, in most Charismatic services I have attended, there is an interpretation.

 

[God's Truth]

Acts 2, records an evangelistic event, in which God blessed the preachers and the listeners with understanding.

The Apostles knew what they were preaching, and the listeners understood what was being said.

Again, In Corinth, the tongue speaker did NOT know what he was saying, nor did anyone listening. That makes Acts 2 and I Corinthians as different as day and night. Reread

I have already explained it to you more than a couple times now.

Just because there were no Jews who understood in Corinth does not mean they were different tongues.

You say that Acts two was a sign for the Jews. Fine. But I am telling you that the spiritual gifts were given to the Church, for use in the church, and not for evangelical purposes, per se. Besides, there was a strong Jewish presence in the Corinthian Church.

Speaking in tongues were a gift given to give a sign to the Jews.

And in the church, tongues and interpretations were to be used simultaneously, as you point out. Paul is quite explicit, however, in I Cor 14:14, that with his prayer language ("If I pray in a tongue") , he did not know what he was saying. The event itself, before interpretations, was the blessing. Not so on the Day of Pentecost. Not at all.

You are speaking nonsense. If there were no one to understand the tongues---IT DOES NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT KIND OF TONGUES.

I do not deny that tongues are misused, and, perhaps, often. But so too, was this gift misused in the First Church, as well.

The misuse of this gift does not prove that it is not of God.

Nowadays tongues are not real tongues. Tongues were a sign to the Jews during the laying of the foundation. Tongues ceased because the foundation has been laid and the sign was given.

It only proves that the gifted are not being thoughtful in the use of their gifts. Nothing more. And, in most Charismatic services I have attended, there is an interpretation.

The believers in the Bible times who spoke in tongues, they spoke in tongues supernaturally. The believers who supposedly speak in tongues nowadays, they speak gibberish and believe God turns their gibberish into supernatural language, and that is a false doctrine.

 

[God's Truth]

Great.

One of my friends thought he was a Christian for about 40 years and had written books against this and that, but one day he was sitting in a meeting and the Holy Spirit came upon him and he said to the Lord, "what is happening, what are you doing" and the Lord said He was washing his sins away.

People can have all the knowledge of the Bible, but until they have a living experience then they remain just knowalls, full of pride, self willed.

LA

What is that supposed to feel like do you think? What does having your sins washed away feel like? Why would the man say what are you doing?

I do not recognize any such scripture in the Bible.

 

[God's Truth]

The New Testament is of very special times, to say the least. God through Jesus Christ gives salvation to us, and God testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will (Hebrews 2:1-4). The gift of tongues is a gift given during the laying of the foundation of the church, and the foundation has been laid (Eph 2:20). Speaking in tongues were for a sign to the Jews: God has fulfilled the purpose of the sign. Yet many Christians believe their glossolalia is the tongue speaking as in the bible.

When people spoke in tongues, they spoke mysteries (1 Corinthians 14:2). We are no longer receiving new mysteries. The mysteries of the gospel has been given (Ephesians 6:19).

 

[jsjohnnt]

I have already explained it to you more than a couple times now.

Just because there were no Jews who understood in Corinth does not mean they were different tongues.



Speaking in tongues were a gift given to give a sign to the Jews.



You are speaking nonsense. If there were no one to understand the tongues---IT DOES NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT KIND OF TONGUES.



Nowadays tongues are not real tongues. Tongues were a sign to the Jews during the laying of the foundation. Tongues ceased because the foundation has been laid and the sign was given.



The believers in the Bible times who spoke in tongues, they spoke in tongues supernaturally. The believers who supposedly speak in tongues nowadays, they speak gibberish and believe God turns their gibberish into supernatural language, and that is a false doctrine.

If no one understands the socalled “language” being spoken, what difference does it make if is “gibberish” (your preferred pejorative) or not. It is meaningless to the listeners, that is the point. And it was this gift that was to be used in private devotional times, according to Paul.

Further, speaking in tongues per I Corinthians, was a gift to the believers and not the Jewish community, per se. What happened in Acts 2, never happened again, in recorded biblical history. It was a one time deal. For you to expand that fact to include all tongue speaking events WITHIN THE CHURCH or in the private life of the Christian, is just plain silly.

Paul is proud of his personal prayer language (“when I pray in a tongue”) . Such was not translated and the meaning of the “language” was not known. How is any of that, “a sign to the Jews?” AND, if Paul does not understand his prayer language, who cares if it is a "real" language or of the angels (And what language did the angels speak, btw? ICor 13:1). Tell us all. Japanese or, maybe you think English is the chosen language of the "heavenlies." But, of course, we all know the answer to my question: the answer is . . . . . . . . . . . WE DON'T KNOW, but we do know that speaking in the tongues of angels was certainly possible or we would not have a I Cor 13:1.

 

[Puppet]

Pure D conjecture. It was a spiritual tongue that demanded a spiritual gift of interpretations to know what being said. Unless and until that happened, the gift of tongues was for spiritual benefit, only. You already have your biblical references.

Now, per Acts 2, you make a valid point, but not as to the Corinthian letter, and that is what I am talking about. It is that experience that is or could be the parallel to current tongue speaking events.

In Acts, tongues are always real, human languages

 

[God's Truth]

If no one understands the socalled “language” being spoken, what difference does it make if is “gibberish” (your preferred pejorative) or not.

God's Truth matters.

It is meaningless to the listeners, that is the point. And it was this gift that was to be used in private devotional times, according to Paul.

You misunderstand Paul, for Paul says that your mind is fruitless for EVEN THE SPEAKER, if the speaker does not interpret even for themselves.

Further, speaking in tongues per I Corinthians, was a gift to the believers and not the Jewish community, per se.

I gave you scripture that clearly says it is for the JEWS, and for UN-believers.

1 Corinthians 14:22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers;

What happened in Acts 2, never happened again, in recorded biblical history. It was a one time deal. For you to expand that fact to include all tongue speaking events WITHIN THE CHURCH or in the private life of the Christian, is just plain silly.

You are the one who is silly for thinking a one time event nullifies the truth.

Speaking in tongues was a sign to the Jews. It also let the Jews know that Gentiles were accepted into salvation. God gave signs and miracles to testify to the gospel message. This was during the laying of the foundation. How do you ever get that it should have then been a one time sign for some Jews and then stopped? There were other Jews to see and hear.

Paul is proud of his personal prayer language (“when I pray in a tongue”) . Such was not translated and the meaning of the “language” was not known.

Of course, Paul could translate his tongues. Do you really think that the Apostle Paul had a fruitless mind? Do you really think that Paul was a hypocrite...telling people to pray to interpret what they are saying for their minds but not for his mind?

How is any of that, “a sign to the Jews?”

I have already explained this to you many times. It IS a sign to the Jews. There were more Jews then just those Jews in Acts. The gift did not stop just because Jews were not around.

AND, if Paul does not understand his prayer language, who cares if it is a "real" language or of the angels (And what language did the angels speak, btw? ICor 13:1).

Angels are ministers to those who inherit salvation. Angels have to speak to us in earthly languages.

Tell us all. Japanese or, maybe you think English is the chosen language of the "heavenlies." But, of course, we all know the answer to my question: the answer is . . . . . . . . . . . WE DON'T KNOW, but we do know that speaking in the tongues of angels was certainly possible or we would not have a I Cor 13:1.

Your comment is tainted with rude sarcasm.
The gibberish that the nowadays tongue speakers speak is NOT the language of angels, it is gibberish and entertainment in falseness.