nick:-6
We do not have and never did have the original manuscripts. In fact we had a whole line of copies before the Bible was translated. There were many copies of Matthew and each one was different. The same is true for all the New Testament books.
As I said elsewhere, among all of the various copies we had there were more than 400 000 variations. Scholars did the best they could to get close to the originals. They will tell you, however, that getting back to the originals is not possible unless we discover older authentic manuscripts.
Within the King James Bible there are some 20 000+ translation errors that have been found. Some are minor and some more major.
If you wish to believe that what you have is the literal inerrant "Word of God" that is fine with me. The fact of the matter is that my studies have shown that it is not. What the Bible does do is attest to the historical Jesus.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Speaking in tongue
nick1289 wrote: The KJV had used the superior hebrew and greek in which it was written. This is said because the Latin bible did not use the older ancient language.
The problem is we don't think it's God's book and that man could out smart God by changing it some how. The only thing we have to worry about is the translation work from the original manuscripts from which Paul or the other penmen had written. The translation into other languages.
Certainly when each book of the bible compares so well with the whole rest of the bible, as Christ compares scripture of the OT telling of himself, the fulling of prophecy, man has not changed it.
This is also important for the biblical calender. We could not arrive at an accurate date if it was changed.
Our God was able to preserve his word, man cannot frustrate God.
god's name was removed from much of the old testament and is never used in the new testament, even by jesus. he allowed it...apparently, and allowed it to be translated and mistranslated and has allowed many many many forms of religion on this earth.
jesus gave us two commands: love god and neighbor. trying to inforce strict doctrine and exactness is what the pharisees did while ignoring the principles to love one another no matter their differences of religion and lifestyle. he sat with harlots and tax collectors and spoke to the samaritans. if we had no bible 'the very stones would cry out'.
if you believe in him you don't need a book at all or any church to belong to.
The problem is we don't think it's God's book and that man could out smart God by changing it some how. The only thing we have to worry about is the translation work from the original manuscripts from which Paul or the other penmen had written. The translation into other languages.
Certainly when each book of the bible compares so well with the whole rest of the bible, as Christ compares scripture of the OT telling of himself, the fulling of prophecy, man has not changed it.
This is also important for the biblical calender. We could not arrive at an accurate date if it was changed.
Our God was able to preserve his word, man cannot frustrate God.
god's name was removed from much of the old testament and is never used in the new testament, even by jesus. he allowed it...apparently, and allowed it to be translated and mistranslated and has allowed many many many forms of religion on this earth.
jesus gave us two commands: love god and neighbor. trying to inforce strict doctrine and exactness is what the pharisees did while ignoring the principles to love one another no matter their differences of religion and lifestyle. he sat with harlots and tax collectors and spoke to the samaritans. if we had no bible 'the very stones would cry out'.
if you believe in him you don't need a book at all or any church to belong to.
Speaking in tongue
nick1289 wrote: The KJV had used the superior hebrew and greek in which it was written. This is said because the Latin bible did not use the older ancient language.
The problem is we don't think it's God's book and that man could out smart God by changing it some how. The only thing we have to worry about is the translation work from the original manuscripts from which Paul or the other penmen had written. The translation into other languages.
Certainly when each book of the bible compares so well with the whole rest of the bible, as Christ compares scripture of the OT telling of himself, the fulling of prophecy, man has not changed it.
This is also important for the biblical calender. We could not arrive at an accurate date if it was changed.
Our God was able to preserve his word, man cannot frustrate God.
I find this post difficult to understand - could you sort out my confusion please :-
1) In which what was written? What did the Latin version use?
2) What else is it if it's not God's book - the trouble is that we don't have the original manuscripts. In some cases we don't even have copies in the same language as the original manuscripts
3) This is where I begin to lose it. How are you comparing each book with the rest of the Bible? Stylistically they differ. The contradict in places - within the Gosples never mind between Old and New Testaments and they even differ theologically (for example, an eye for an eye does not sit too well with turn the other cheek). I do not see how you can say, so catagorically, that man has not changed it.
4) What date are you trying to pinpoint and why is it so important?
The problem is we don't think it's God's book and that man could out smart God by changing it some how. The only thing we have to worry about is the translation work from the original manuscripts from which Paul or the other penmen had written. The translation into other languages.
Certainly when each book of the bible compares so well with the whole rest of the bible, as Christ compares scripture of the OT telling of himself, the fulling of prophecy, man has not changed it.
This is also important for the biblical calender. We could not arrive at an accurate date if it was changed.
Our God was able to preserve his word, man cannot frustrate God.
I find this post difficult to understand - could you sort out my confusion please :-
1) In which what was written? What did the Latin version use?
2) What else is it if it's not God's book - the trouble is that we don't have the original manuscripts. In some cases we don't even have copies in the same language as the original manuscripts
3) This is where I begin to lose it. How are you comparing each book with the rest of the Bible? Stylistically they differ. The contradict in places - within the Gosples never mind between Old and New Testaments and they even differ theologically (for example, an eye for an eye does not sit too well with turn the other cheek). I do not see how you can say, so catagorically, that man has not changed it.
4) What date are you trying to pinpoint and why is it so important?
Speaking in tongue
Bryn Mawr wrote: I find this post difficult to understand - could you sort out my confusion please :-
1) In which what was written? What did the Latin version use?
2) What else is it if it's not God's book - the trouble is that we don't have the original manuscripts. In some cases we don't even have copies in the same language as the original manuscripts
3) This is where I begin to lose it. How are you comparing each book with the rest of the Bible? Stylistically they differ. The contradict in places - within the Gosples never mind between Old and New Testaments and they even differ theologically (for example, an eye for an eye does not sit too well with turn the other cheek). I do not see how you can say, so catagorically, that man has not changed it.
4) What date are you trying to pinpoint and why is it so important?
this is the problem with demanding exact following of the scriptures. if anything the dramatic evolution of doctrine from jealous yahweh to humble jesus allows us to see how silly it is to stick to one set of rules over many centuries. the prophets of old believed in god and fitted their ideas of god and what he wanted to what was acceptable to their time. why can we not do the same?
and why on earth do people insist on naming dates when the bible itself worns against doing such a stupid thing! :wah:
1) In which what was written? What did the Latin version use?
2) What else is it if it's not God's book - the trouble is that we don't have the original manuscripts. In some cases we don't even have copies in the same language as the original manuscripts
3) This is where I begin to lose it. How are you comparing each book with the rest of the Bible? Stylistically they differ. The contradict in places - within the Gosples never mind between Old and New Testaments and they even differ theologically (for example, an eye for an eye does not sit too well with turn the other cheek). I do not see how you can say, so catagorically, that man has not changed it.
4) What date are you trying to pinpoint and why is it so important?
this is the problem with demanding exact following of the scriptures. if anything the dramatic evolution of doctrine from jealous yahweh to humble jesus allows us to see how silly it is to stick to one set of rules over many centuries. the prophets of old believed in god and fitted their ideas of god and what he wanted to what was acceptable to their time. why can we not do the same?
and why on earth do people insist on naming dates when the bible itself worns against doing such a stupid thing! :wah:
Speaking in tongue
The following is a quote from the second session of a workshop that is being presented by our priest in charge. It is an excellent workshop dealing with modern theology. It does answer to some of the issues being raised.
2. thinking theologically
Focus:
While family, education, social class, and geography all contribute to
how we think about God, our experiences and perceptions along life's
journey also shape our thinking. Being comfortable with ambiguity,
metaphor, and uncertainty help us get God "out of the box" and rethink
theological ideas that have become barriers to our further spiritual
growth.
"so what's wrong with a question?"
Someone once asked their rabbi, "Why is it that rabbis always answer a ques-
tion with another question?" The rabbi answers, "So what's wrong with a ques-
tion?"
o •y
Jesus was typical of the rabbis of his day. According to the canonical gospels, ~Po
he rarely gave a straight answer to a question. Instead he responded with an-
other question or told a story. Rather than offer his disciples answers to life's J
most perplexing problems, Jesus put his hearers in a position of having to
think for themselves. For the most part, Jesus was not offering simple an-
swers. Absolute answers have a tendency to offer a certainty and a false ~_
sense of security that can become barriers to a developing awareness of God.
answers become substitutes for God
Reading the Bible closely, it becomes clear that there's no one way of under-
standing who God is and how God relates to the world. The Bible is the wit-
ness of generations of faithful people recording their own understandings of
the divine in their particular time, place, and culture. This theological pluralism
reveals changing, developing, and sometimes conflicting ideas about God.
Beware of the person who says: "I've got God all figured out." Not even Jesus
was that bold - instead he opted for stories that demanded thought, raised
questions, and often went counter to conventional attitudes. To claim a mo-
nopoly on the truth, leaving no room for dialogue or input from others, turns
the discipline of thinking theologically into a mere exercise in fact-checking.
The Bible itself represents a variety of perspectives, each reflecting different
understandings of God. As Hebrew scripture is consistent, almost without ex-
ception, in claiming that people cannot see God and live, it's little wonder that
the divine is cloaked in mystery. The challenge of thinking theologically is
about maintaining a creative tension between ideas that generates dialogue,
not absolute certainty. At its best, thinking theologically is not about facts, but
about wrestling with often abstract ideas and concepts.
Asking difficult questions is at the heart of both theological integrity and spiri-
tual growth. Being satisfied with easy answers is a "cop out". Excessive certi-
tude can become a substitute for God and cripple an otherwise dynamic rela-
tionship with the mystery of the divine.
© 2005 livingthequestions.com
I have included the web site to give credit where it is due.
Shalom
Ted:-6
2. thinking theologically
Focus:
While family, education, social class, and geography all contribute to
how we think about God, our experiences and perceptions along life's
journey also shape our thinking. Being comfortable with ambiguity,
metaphor, and uncertainty help us get God "out of the box" and rethink
theological ideas that have become barriers to our further spiritual
growth.
"so what's wrong with a question?"
Someone once asked their rabbi, "Why is it that rabbis always answer a ques-
tion with another question?" The rabbi answers, "So what's wrong with a ques-
tion?"
o •y
Jesus was typical of the rabbis of his day. According to the canonical gospels, ~Po
he rarely gave a straight answer to a question. Instead he responded with an-
other question or told a story. Rather than offer his disciples answers to life's J
most perplexing problems, Jesus put his hearers in a position of having to
think for themselves. For the most part, Jesus was not offering simple an-
swers. Absolute answers have a tendency to offer a certainty and a false ~_
sense of security that can become barriers to a developing awareness of God.
answers become substitutes for God
Reading the Bible closely, it becomes clear that there's no one way of under-
standing who God is and how God relates to the world. The Bible is the wit-
ness of generations of faithful people recording their own understandings of
the divine in their particular time, place, and culture. This theological pluralism
reveals changing, developing, and sometimes conflicting ideas about God.
Beware of the person who says: "I've got God all figured out." Not even Jesus
was that bold - instead he opted for stories that demanded thought, raised
questions, and often went counter to conventional attitudes. To claim a mo-
nopoly on the truth, leaving no room for dialogue or input from others, turns
the discipline of thinking theologically into a mere exercise in fact-checking.
The Bible itself represents a variety of perspectives, each reflecting different
understandings of God. As Hebrew scripture is consistent, almost without ex-
ception, in claiming that people cannot see God and live, it's little wonder that
the divine is cloaked in mystery. The challenge of thinking theologically is
about maintaining a creative tension between ideas that generates dialogue,
not absolute certainty. At its best, thinking theologically is not about facts, but
about wrestling with often abstract ideas and concepts.
Asking difficult questions is at the heart of both theological integrity and spiri-
tual growth. Being satisfied with easy answers is a "cop out". Excessive certi-
tude can become a substitute for God and cripple an otherwise dynamic rela-
tionship with the mystery of the divine.
© 2005 livingthequestions.com
I have included the web site to give credit where it is due.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Ted wrote: The following is a quote from the second session of a workshop that is being presented by our priest in charge. It is an excellent workshop dealing with modern theology. It does answer to some of the issues being raised.
2. thinking theologically
Focus:
While family, education, social class, and geography all contribute to
how we think about God, our experiences and perceptions along life's
journey also shape our thinking. Being comfortable with ambiguity,
metaphor, and uncertainty help us get God "out of the box" and rethink
theological ideas that have become barriers to our further spiritual
growth.
"so what's wrong with a question?"
Someone once asked their rabbi, "Why is it that rabbis always answer a ques-
tion with another question?" The rabbi answers, "So what's wrong with a ques-
tion?"
o •y
Jesus was typical of the rabbis of his day. According to the canonical gospels, ~Po
he rarely gave a straight answer to a question. Instead he responded with an-
other question or told a story. Rather than offer his disciples answers to life's J
most perplexing problems, Jesus put his hearers in a position of having to
think for themselves. For the most part, Jesus was not offering simple an-
swers. Absolute answers have a tendency to offer a certainty and a false ~_
sense of security that can become barriers to a developing awareness of God.
answers become substitutes for God
Reading the Bible closely, it becomes clear that there's no one way of under-
standing who God is and how God relates to the world. The Bible is the wit-
ness of generations of faithful people recording their own understandings of
the divine in their particular time, place, and culture. This theological pluralism
reveals changing, developing, and sometimes conflicting ideas about God.
Beware of the person who says: "I've got God all figured out." Not even Jesus
was that bold - instead he opted for stories that demanded thought, raised
questions, and often went counter to conventional attitudes. To claim a mo-
nopoly on the truth, leaving no room for dialogue or input from others, turns
the discipline of thinking theologically into a mere exercise in fact-checking.
The Bible itself represents a variety of perspectives, each reflecting different
understandings of God. As Hebrew scripture is consistent, almost without ex-
ception, in claiming that people cannot see God and live, it's little wonder that
the divine is cloaked in mystery. The challenge of thinking theologically is
about maintaining a creative tension between ideas that generates dialogue,
not absolute certainty. At its best, thinking theologically is not about facts, but
about wrestling with often abstract ideas and concepts.
Asking difficult questions is at the heart of both theological integrity and spiri-
tual growth. Being satisfied with easy answers is a "cop out". Excessive certi-
tude can become a substitute for God and cripple an otherwise dynamic rela-
tionship with the mystery of the divine.
© 2005 livingthequestions.com
I have included the web site to give credit where it is due.
Shalom
Ted:-6
very good
2. thinking theologically
Focus:
While family, education, social class, and geography all contribute to
how we think about God, our experiences and perceptions along life's
journey also shape our thinking. Being comfortable with ambiguity,
metaphor, and uncertainty help us get God "out of the box" and rethink
theological ideas that have become barriers to our further spiritual
growth.
"so what's wrong with a question?"
Someone once asked their rabbi, "Why is it that rabbis always answer a ques-
tion with another question?" The rabbi answers, "So what's wrong with a ques-
tion?"
o •y
Jesus was typical of the rabbis of his day. According to the canonical gospels, ~Po
he rarely gave a straight answer to a question. Instead he responded with an-
other question or told a story. Rather than offer his disciples answers to life's J
most perplexing problems, Jesus put his hearers in a position of having to
think for themselves. For the most part, Jesus was not offering simple an-
swers. Absolute answers have a tendency to offer a certainty and a false ~_
sense of security that can become barriers to a developing awareness of God.
answers become substitutes for God
Reading the Bible closely, it becomes clear that there's no one way of under-
standing who God is and how God relates to the world. The Bible is the wit-
ness of generations of faithful people recording their own understandings of
the divine in their particular time, place, and culture. This theological pluralism
reveals changing, developing, and sometimes conflicting ideas about God.
Beware of the person who says: "I've got God all figured out." Not even Jesus
was that bold - instead he opted for stories that demanded thought, raised
questions, and often went counter to conventional attitudes. To claim a mo-
nopoly on the truth, leaving no room for dialogue or input from others, turns
the discipline of thinking theologically into a mere exercise in fact-checking.
The Bible itself represents a variety of perspectives, each reflecting different
understandings of God. As Hebrew scripture is consistent, almost without ex-
ception, in claiming that people cannot see God and live, it's little wonder that
the divine is cloaked in mystery. The challenge of thinking theologically is
about maintaining a creative tension between ideas that generates dialogue,
not absolute certainty. At its best, thinking theologically is not about facts, but
about wrestling with often abstract ideas and concepts.
Asking difficult questions is at the heart of both theological integrity and spiri-
tual growth. Being satisfied with easy answers is a "cop out". Excessive certi-
tude can become a substitute for God and cripple an otherwise dynamic rela-
tionship with the mystery of the divine.
© 2005 livingthequestions.com
I have included the web site to give credit where it is due.
Shalom
Ted:-6
very good
Speaking in tongue
ARgi:-6
That is where modern theology is heading.
The workshop is one of the best I have ever been involved in.
Shalom
Ted:-6
That is where modern theology is heading.
The workshop is one of the best I have ever been involved in.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Ted wrote: ARgi:-6
That is where modern theology is heading.
The workshop is one of the best I have ever been involved in.
Shalom
Ted:-6
answers become substitutes for God
this is actually something i was thinking about this week. when one's set of beliefs becomes their god.
That is where modern theology is heading.
The workshop is one of the best I have ever been involved in.
Shalom
Ted:-6
answers become substitutes for God
this is actually something i was thinking about this week. when one's set of beliefs becomes their god.
Speaking in tongue
ARgi:-6
"Answers become a substitute for God". How true it is.
Shalom
Ted:-6
"Answers become a substitute for God". How true it is.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Yes, I personally speak in tongues or am a glossolalists.
For me personally it is very edifying ......and no it doesn't just happen in the church. The Holy Spirit is with me all the time, not just in church.
When I have trouble praying the Holy Spirit takes over and prays for me, giving my mind and body a rest.
Greater is HE that is in me than He that is in the world.
Dawnmarie
For me personally it is very edifying ......and no it doesn't just happen in the church. The Holy Spirit is with me all the time, not just in church.
When I have trouble praying the Holy Spirit takes over and prays for me, giving my mind and body a rest.
Greater is HE that is in me than He that is in the world.
Dawnmarie
Speaking in tongue
dawnmarie;451156 wrote: Yes, I personally speak in tongues or am a glossolalists.
For me personally it is very edifying ......and no it doesn't just happen in the church. The Holy Spirit is with me all the time, not just in church.
When I have trouble praying the Holy Spirit takes over and prays for me, giving my mind and body a rest.
Greater is HE that is in me than He that is in the world.
Dawnmarie
Personnaly having been married to a woman who proffesses to speak in tonges I believe it is gibberish and people who pretend to understand it are suffering from the Emporers cloths syndrome. For myself I believe that if the holy spirit takes over your praying for you that is a bit like God Talking to himself I would rather have a two way chat with the lord.
For me personally it is very edifying ......and no it doesn't just happen in the church. The Holy Spirit is with me all the time, not just in church.
When I have trouble praying the Holy Spirit takes over and prays for me, giving my mind and body a rest.
Greater is HE that is in me than He that is in the world.
Dawnmarie
Personnaly having been married to a woman who proffesses to speak in tonges I believe it is gibberish and people who pretend to understand it are suffering from the Emporers cloths syndrome. For myself I believe that if the holy spirit takes over your praying for you that is a bit like God Talking to himself I would rather have a two way chat with the lord.
Speaking in tongue
Actually, when the Holy Spirit takes over for me, I don't know what I'm praying for, could be anyone or anything, When the Spirit takes over.....there is a need.
I don't claim to understand it....I just know that when the Holy Spirit wakes me up at 1am to pray. I have learned to obey.
It's not The Lord having a conversation with himself, It is the Holy Spirit prompting me to pray for someone or about someone.
Dawnmarie
I don't claim to understand it....I just know that when the Holy Spirit wakes me up at 1am to pray. I have learned to obey.
It's not The Lord having a conversation with himself, It is the Holy Spirit prompting me to pray for someone or about someone.
Dawnmarie
Speaking in tongue
dawnmarie;454111 wrote: Actually, when the Holy Spirit takes over for me, I don't know what I'm praying for, could be anyone or anything, When the Spirit takes over.....there is a need.
I don't claim to understand it....I just know that when the Holy Spirit wakes me up at 1am to pray. I have learned to obey.
It's not The Lord having a conversation with himself, It is the Holy Spirit prompting me to pray for someone or about someone.
Dawnmarie
Next time pray for me.
I don't claim to understand it....I just know that when the Holy Spirit wakes me up at 1am to pray. I have learned to obey.
It's not The Lord having a conversation with himself, It is the Holy Spirit prompting me to pray for someone or about someone.
Dawnmarie
Next time pray for me.
Speaking in tongue
I'd be glad to pray for you.
dawnmarie
dawnmarie
Speaking in tongue
weinbeck;393412 wrote: Has anybody out there witnessed somebody speaking in tongue? I personally have never heard anybody speak in tongue, and am wondering whether the participant was aware of it afterwards. Although it would probably happen in the sanctity of a church so I'd be perfectly safe, it would probably scare the living daylights out of me!!
I hear people speaking in tongue all the time. The church that I have recently been attending, speaks in tongue like it is English. I was so shocked sort of speak because I had never seen or actually heard anyone speak in tongue. But it is another language and you will be sort of scared. I havent joined this church yet but I am seriously thinkin about it. I want to be closer with God and this is a good church. I have been to lots of different churches and I never got a message. This church makes me anxious when I'm there. The preacher is a teacher. He's a Godly man. And he is REAL.......... But answer to question yes I have and now I think it is amazing and wonderful. And hopefully one day when I get to closer to the Lord, he will send me that gift to praise Him in another way. But Bishop T.D. Jakes speaks in tongue a little bit on a cd that I have. It is a wonderful thing I think to have that gift. I think it should be given to you by the Lord not taught by a nonbeliever. That is just my opinion.
I hear people speaking in tongue all the time. The church that I have recently been attending, speaks in tongue like it is English. I was so shocked sort of speak because I had never seen or actually heard anyone speak in tongue. But it is another language and you will be sort of scared. I havent joined this church yet but I am seriously thinkin about it. I want to be closer with God and this is a good church. I have been to lots of different churches and I never got a message. This church makes me anxious when I'm there. The preacher is a teacher. He's a Godly man. And he is REAL.......... But answer to question yes I have and now I think it is amazing and wonderful. And hopefully one day when I get to closer to the Lord, he will send me that gift to praise Him in another way. But Bishop T.D. Jakes speaks in tongue a little bit on a cd that I have. It is a wonderful thing I think to have that gift. I think it should be given to you by the Lord not taught by a nonbeliever. That is just my opinion.
Speaking in tongue
twizzel;454398 wrote: Next time pray for me.
The church I attend has taught me alot since I have been going there. I didnt really know that people pray at a certain time. But I now know and I have done it and I try to do it more and more maybe about 5:00 am everyday. And the things I pray about is being worked on. I know the Lord here's me and I was told that you can plan your day by prayer. And it has proven to be right. I am learning alot as the day goes by. And getting to know the Lord is a beautiful thing. :-4
The church I attend has taught me alot since I have been going there. I didnt really know that people pray at a certain time. But I now know and I have done it and I try to do it more and more maybe about 5:00 am everyday. And the things I pray about is being worked on. I know the Lord here's me and I was told that you can plan your day by prayer. And it has proven to be right. I am learning alot as the day goes by. And getting to know the Lord is a beautiful thing. :-4
Speaking in tongue
I've never heard it. IMPO, it sounds or seems very aberrated.
Your Kitty Forum
My Website
My Website
-
William Ess
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am
Speaking in tongue
kason01;466104 wrote: I hear people speaking in tongue all the time. The church that I have recently been attending, speaks in tongue like it is English. I was so shocked sort of speak because I had never seen or actually heard anyone speak in tongue. But it is another language and you will be sort of scared. I havent joined this church yet but I am seriously thinkin about it. I want to be closer with God and this is a good church. I have been to lots of different churches and I never got a message. This church makes me anxious when I'm there. The preacher is a teacher. He's a Godly man. And he is REAL.......... But answer to question yes I have and now I think it is amazing and wonderful. And hopefully one day when I get to closer to the Lord, he will send me that gift to praise Him in another way. But Bishop T.D. Jakes speaks in tongue a little bit on a cd that I have. It is a wonderful thing I think to have that gift. I think it should be given to you by the Lord not taught by a nonbeliever. That is just my opinion.
Is this church by any chance located in the United States of America?
Is this church by any chance located in the United States of America?
Speaking in tongue
William Ess;466198 wrote: Is this church by any chance located in the United States of America?
Does speaking in tongue do anything? Does it have any purpose? As yet, the only use for it that I have heard is that it is edifying to the people who do it, in which case they could be satisfied doing it in private. The down side is that it seemes to scare people out of their wits which I don't think is a very good thing to do.
Just questions as I am interested in what it is for.:-6
Does speaking in tongue do anything? Does it have any purpose? As yet, the only use for it that I have heard is that it is edifying to the people who do it, in which case they could be satisfied doing it in private. The down side is that it seemes to scare people out of their wits which I don't think is a very good thing to do.
Just questions as I am interested in what it is for.:-6
miriam:yh_flower
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
Speaking in tongue
dawnmarie;454816 wrote: I'd be glad to pray for you.
dawnmarie
Thank you.
dawnmarie
Thank you.
Speaking in tongue
Saffron;466113 wrote: I've never heard it. IMPO, it sounds or seems very aberrated.
You havn't missed anything unless you like gibberish.
You havn't missed anything unless you like gibberish.
-
acousticide
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:12 pm
Speaking in tongue
WOW,
Such misinformed and unread people.
First of all
During Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and they started speaking in tongues. NOT THEIR OWN LANGUAGES.
I am paraphrasing here, but the people were marveling because they heard these Judeans speaking in the language of the VISITORS. Not only were they speaking the languages, but also the dialects, etc....
Thats why the people were freaking
Also, there are different manifestations of speaking in tongues.
1. for personal edification, when the Spirit prays for you through you.
2. For prophecy, someone speaks in tongues, and someone gives the interpretations.
This is not the only instances.
I was in a large Assembly of God church in Houston 25 years ago, a woman stood up and spoke in tongues for almost 5 minutes.
There was no interpretation, but within 60 seconds of her finishing, a group of 30 visitors from a small village in Africa ran to the altar and asked for salvation.
Not only did she speak their language and dialect, but she spoke as someone from the village would.
They later explained that people from nearby villages spoke similarly, but, only 200-300 people in their area would know how to speak like that...
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST that you are Christians, but fail to belive?
Without FAITH it is impossible to please God.
Such misinformed and unread people.
First of all
During Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and they started speaking in tongues. NOT THEIR OWN LANGUAGES.
I am paraphrasing here, but the people were marveling because they heard these Judeans speaking in the language of the VISITORS. Not only were they speaking the languages, but also the dialects, etc....
Thats why the people were freaking
Also, there are different manifestations of speaking in tongues.
1. for personal edification, when the Spirit prays for you through you.
2. For prophecy, someone speaks in tongues, and someone gives the interpretations.
This is not the only instances.
I was in a large Assembly of God church in Houston 25 years ago, a woman stood up and spoke in tongues for almost 5 minutes.
There was no interpretation, but within 60 seconds of her finishing, a group of 30 visitors from a small village in Africa ran to the altar and asked for salvation.
Not only did she speak their language and dialect, but she spoke as someone from the village would.
They later explained that people from nearby villages spoke similarly, but, only 200-300 people in their area would know how to speak like that...
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST that you are Christians, but fail to belive?
Without FAITH it is impossible to please God.
Speaking in tongue
accousticide:-6
Certainly, welcome to the Garden.
Please, however, to suggest that people are misinformed and unread is not a good start. Your closing sentence is no better.
Please be advised there are some 22 000 Christian denominations around the world. Many of them claim to have the sole handle on the truth and others are more inclusive and open.
Because someone does not think or believe as you do does not make them less of a Christian. You have your concepts and so do 22 000 different denominations.
You do not know the folks on this forum and would be surprised at how literate they are. Your opening comment is hardly appropriate.
I do not say these things to be unkind but to let you know that most folks here will react very negatively to such statements. Of course none of us is perfect and we each have out strengths and limitations. That is part of the human condition.
From a devout Christian-pluralist.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Certainly, welcome to the Garden.
Please, however, to suggest that people are misinformed and unread is not a good start. Your closing sentence is no better.
Please be advised there are some 22 000 Christian denominations around the world. Many of them claim to have the sole handle on the truth and others are more inclusive and open.
Because someone does not think or believe as you do does not make them less of a Christian. You have your concepts and so do 22 000 different denominations.
You do not know the folks on this forum and would be surprised at how literate they are. Your opening comment is hardly appropriate.
I do not say these things to be unkind but to let you know that most folks here will react very negatively to such statements. Of course none of us is perfect and we each have out strengths and limitations. That is part of the human condition.
From a devout Christian-pluralist.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
I should add that I hardly think I can speak in tongues since I only have one tongue.LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
acousticide;503657 wrote: WOW,
Such misinformed and unread people.
First of all
During Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and they started speaking in tongues. NOT THEIR OWN LANGUAGES.
I am paraphrasing here, but the people were marveling because they heard these Judeans speaking in the language of the VISITORS. Not only were they speaking the languages, but also the dialects, etc....
Thats why the people were freaking
Also, there are different manifestations of speaking in tongues.
1. for personal edification, when the Spirit prays for you through you.
2. For prophecy, someone speaks in tongues, and someone gives the interpretations.
This is not the only instances.
I was in a large Assembly of God church in Houston 25 years ago, a woman stood up and spoke in tongues for almost 5 minutes.
There was no interpretation, but within 60 seconds of her finishing, a group of 30 visitors from a small village in Africa ran to the altar and asked for salvation.
Not only did she speak their language and dialect, but she spoke as someone from the village would.
They later explained that people from nearby villages spoke similarly, but, only 200-300 people in their area would know how to speak like that...
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST that you are Christians, but fail to belive?
Without FAITH it is impossible to please God.
I bow to the greater knowledge of someone who was there. However gibberish I said and gibberish I mean. My ex wife speaks in tonges or so she says as do her friends, however as there is not a sane one among them.
Such misinformed and unread people.
First of all
During Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and they started speaking in tongues. NOT THEIR OWN LANGUAGES.
I am paraphrasing here, but the people were marveling because they heard these Judeans speaking in the language of the VISITORS. Not only were they speaking the languages, but also the dialects, etc....
Thats why the people were freaking
Also, there are different manifestations of speaking in tongues.
1. for personal edification, when the Spirit prays for you through you.
2. For prophecy, someone speaks in tongues, and someone gives the interpretations.
This is not the only instances.
I was in a large Assembly of God church in Houston 25 years ago, a woman stood up and spoke in tongues for almost 5 minutes.
There was no interpretation, but within 60 seconds of her finishing, a group of 30 visitors from a small village in Africa ran to the altar and asked for salvation.
Not only did she speak their language and dialect, but she spoke as someone from the village would.
They later explained that people from nearby villages spoke similarly, but, only 200-300 people in their area would know how to speak like that...
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST that you are Christians, but fail to belive?
Without FAITH it is impossible to please God.
I bow to the greater knowledge of someone who was there. However gibberish I said and gibberish I mean. My ex wife speaks in tonges or so she says as do her friends, however as there is not a sane one among them.
Speaking in tongue
accousticide:-6
Perhaps you could enlighten us, in your opinion, as to the correct one of the 22 000 denominations.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Perhaps you could enlighten us, in your opinion, as to the correct one of the 22 000 denominations.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
acousticide
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:12 pm
Speaking in tongue
ok, first of all, I humbly apologize to anyone I have offended, I do not mean to do that...
A.D.D. seems to come out worse when typing. I dont think clearly about how I say things. I am truly sorry for any perceived inference that people are ignorant.
I do not think that there is ANY true or singular denomination in Christianity.
Jesus himself said I AM the way the truth and the light.
If any man is thirsty (the Aramaic implies thirsty for knowledge)
let him come to me and I will give him rivers of living water.
Ironically the modern word religion comes from an old word religare meaning to tie fast or to bind.
I know in the bible it says, do not forsake the gathering together of yourselves.
But, I kind of belive that after all of the religious twistings of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the way they turned Judaism into rules and regulations that had gotten so far removed from the actual law that God had given them. I read that Christ was the fulfillment of the law, that we are not to be bound by the laws.
The bilbe also says that "the traditions of men have made the word of God of no effect."
Again, sorry if I jumped in with both feet and hurt anyones feelings or created enemies. I did not mean to do this.
Please accept my apology.
A.D.D. seems to come out worse when typing. I dont think clearly about how I say things. I am truly sorry for any perceived inference that people are ignorant.
I do not think that there is ANY true or singular denomination in Christianity.
Jesus himself said I AM the way the truth and the light.
If any man is thirsty (the Aramaic implies thirsty for knowledge)
let him come to me and I will give him rivers of living water.
Ironically the modern word religion comes from an old word religare meaning to tie fast or to bind.
I know in the bible it says, do not forsake the gathering together of yourselves.
But, I kind of belive that after all of the religious twistings of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the way they turned Judaism into rules and regulations that had gotten so far removed from the actual law that God had given them. I read that Christ was the fulfillment of the law, that we are not to be bound by the laws.
The bilbe also says that "the traditions of men have made the word of God of no effect."
Again, sorry if I jumped in with both feet and hurt anyones feelings or created enemies. I did not mean to do this.
Please accept my apology.
Speaking in tongue
accousticide:-6
I think all would accept that apology. I might further add "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." None coming from here.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I think all would accept that apology. I might further add "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." None coming from here.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
accousticide:-6
I think that we need to be very cautious about the phrase "traditions of men". The Gospels themselves are not biographies. They are what the church had come to believe about Jesus by the time of writing. In short they present the developing traditions of the early church. Marcus Borg, D. Crossan, J. Spong and a host of others.
In fact we do not even know who the authors were. The names were added much later for identification purposes.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I think that we need to be very cautious about the phrase "traditions of men". The Gospels themselves are not biographies. They are what the church had come to believe about Jesus by the time of writing. In short they present the developing traditions of the early church. Marcus Borg, D. Crossan, J. Spong and a host of others.
In fact we do not even know who the authors were. The names were added much later for identification purposes.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Ted;504586 wrote: accousticide:-6
Perhaps you could enlighten us, in your opinion, as to the correct one of the 22 000 denominations.
Shalom
Ted:-6
why Roman Catholic of course Peter built the church on the rock of Rome anything else is a dim copy
Perhaps you could enlighten us, in your opinion, as to the correct one of the 22 000 denominations.
Shalom
Ted:-6
why Roman Catholic of course Peter built the church on the rock of Rome anything else is a dim copy
-
acousticide
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:12 pm
Speaking in tongue
I agree with you about the Gospels, They were written and attributed to the authors.
However, the bulk of the new testament with the exception of the 4 gospels and the book of the revelation were written by Paul to different churches in the first century. I do agree that they are translations of what they felt God asked them to speak. I feel that when people say that they believe in God and the bible but say portions of it are allegories or myths leaves something out. Surely if God IS the supreme being, then why wouldnt he have known HOW the people would interpret the ideas he was putting into their minds, so that it would come out exactly how he wanted it to.
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
However, the bulk of the new testament with the exception of the 4 gospels and the book of the revelation were written by Paul to different churches in the first century. I do agree that they are translations of what they felt God asked them to speak. I feel that when people say that they believe in God and the bible but say portions of it are allegories or myths leaves something out. Surely if God IS the supreme being, then why wouldnt he have known HOW the people would interpret the ideas he was putting into their minds, so that it would come out exactly how he wanted it to.
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
Speaking in tongue
Accousticide:-6
Of all the letters in the New Testament assigned to Paul as the writer only 7 were written by him and the rest forged in his name. In addition others made additions to the authentic Pauline letters over the years.
Paul wrote, with absolute certainty Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Philippians's, 1Thesaloneans,Philemon and Galatians. The rest are forgeries written after Paul's death by folks who wanted to give their work the authority of an apostle.
As far as metaphor and midrash goes almost the entire Bible makes great use of both and there is some but relatively little history there.
Why is this so? Our human languages, all of them, are ill equipped to deal with the Divine. We have no way of defining or describing the divine and must resort to metaphor. Spong, Borg, Crossan, Ehrman and a host of other Biblical and historical scholars.
The birth stories of Jesus are a perfect example of a combination of metaphor, midrash and utilizing the OT to make some very important points. Something does not have to be historically accurate to present profound truths. So with the birth stories, after the experience of the historical Jesus and the risen Christ it was decided that he was indeed the Messiah. So going back to the OT they sought out prophesies that apparently pointed to the coming Messiah. The stories were written as such. The profound truth being presented was that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. This is known as midrash and was typical of ancient Hebrew writing style. We know that Jesus was born, was baptized by John, some of what he said, that he was crucified and burried. Something profound happened during the Easter event that convinced these people that Jesus had in fact risen.
Jesus of Nazareth was born in Nazareth, there is no record of a census at that time and Roman records are noted for their accuracy, no magi, no flight into Egypt. The story of the star, the magi, the flight into Egypt, the birth in Bethlehem all come from the OT. That is the nature of midrash.
The Gospels themselves are the traditions of the early church, clearly the traditions of men.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Of all the letters in the New Testament assigned to Paul as the writer only 7 were written by him and the rest forged in his name. In addition others made additions to the authentic Pauline letters over the years.
Paul wrote, with absolute certainty Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Philippians's, 1Thesaloneans,Philemon and Galatians. The rest are forgeries written after Paul's death by folks who wanted to give their work the authority of an apostle.
As far as metaphor and midrash goes almost the entire Bible makes great use of both and there is some but relatively little history there.
Why is this so? Our human languages, all of them, are ill equipped to deal with the Divine. We have no way of defining or describing the divine and must resort to metaphor. Spong, Borg, Crossan, Ehrman and a host of other Biblical and historical scholars.
The birth stories of Jesus are a perfect example of a combination of metaphor, midrash and utilizing the OT to make some very important points. Something does not have to be historically accurate to present profound truths. So with the birth stories, after the experience of the historical Jesus and the risen Christ it was decided that he was indeed the Messiah. So going back to the OT they sought out prophesies that apparently pointed to the coming Messiah. The stories were written as such. The profound truth being presented was that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. This is known as midrash and was typical of ancient Hebrew writing style. We know that Jesus was born, was baptized by John, some of what he said, that he was crucified and burried. Something profound happened during the Easter event that convinced these people that Jesus had in fact risen.
Jesus of Nazareth was born in Nazareth, there is no record of a census at that time and Roman records are noted for their accuracy, no magi, no flight into Egypt. The story of the star, the magi, the flight into Egypt, the birth in Bethlehem all come from the OT. That is the nature of midrash.
The Gospels themselves are the traditions of the early church, clearly the traditions of men.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
I think it's a load of crap. I've lost faith in all religions, especially anything having to do with "christians".
Your Kitty Forum
My Website
My Website
Speaking in tongue
Saffron:-6
That may be your opinion, and that is fine, but there are hundreds of scholars who simply don't agree. They are indeed ferreting out the profound truths being presented in the Bible as well as other sacred books.
I do hope things are going well for you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
That may be your opinion, and that is fine, but there are hundreds of scholars who simply don't agree. They are indeed ferreting out the profound truths being presented in the Bible as well as other sacred books.
I do hope things are going well for you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Ted;505975 wrote: Saffron:-6
That may be your opinion, and that is fine, but there are hundreds of scholars who simply don't agree. They are indeed ferreting out the profound truths being presented in the Bible as well as other sacred books.
I do hope things are going well for you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
YEs things have gotten much better. I guess I should pm you. I left that church where I was all involved. And I am in a much better place now.
That may be your opinion, and that is fine, but there are hundreds of scholars who simply don't agree. They are indeed ferreting out the profound truths being presented in the Bible as well as other sacred books.
I do hope things are going well for you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
YEs things have gotten much better. I guess I should pm you. I left that church where I was all involved. And I am in a much better place now.
Your Kitty Forum
My Website
My Website
Speaking in tongue
Saffron:-6
Wonderful. Good move.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wonderful. Good move.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
acousticide;505836 wrote: I agree with you about the Gospels, They were written and attributed to the authors.
However, the bulk of the new testament with the exception of the 4 gospels and the book of the revelation were written by Paul to different churches in the first century. I do agree that they are translations of what they felt God asked them to speak. I feel that when people say that they believe in God and the bible but say portions of it are allegories or myths leaves something out. Surely if God IS the supreme being, then why wouldnt he have known HOW the people would interpret the ideas he was putting into their minds, so that it would come out exactly how he wanted it to.
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
Oh ye of little faith to God all things are possible.
However, the bulk of the new testament with the exception of the 4 gospels and the book of the revelation were written by Paul to different churches in the first century. I do agree that they are translations of what they felt God asked them to speak. I feel that when people say that they believe in God and the bible but say portions of it are allegories or myths leaves something out. Surely if God IS the supreme being, then why wouldnt he have known HOW the people would interpret the ideas he was putting into their minds, so that it would come out exactly how he wanted it to.
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
Oh ye of little faith to God all things are possible.
Speaking in tongue
twizzel:-6
It is not a matter of right belief or having faith that the Bible is the inerrant, absolute word of God but of living in a developing, transforming relationship with the God we see manifested in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. This means having (faith) trust in God.
Shalom
Ted:-6
It is not a matter of right belief or having faith that the Bible is the inerrant, absolute word of God but of living in a developing, transforming relationship with the God we see manifested in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. This means having (faith) trust in God.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
acousticide;505836 wrote:
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
Even for those two I've seen explanations of possible mechanisms which would make them possible
As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
Even for those two I've seen explanations of possible mechanisms which would make them possible
Speaking in tongue
acousticide;505836 wrote: As far as some of the myths in the old testament, I have only heard people claim that two things were impossible.
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
I have slight problems with Jonah surviving for days in the belly of the whale. Eww.
What else, now I'm thinking about it. Methuselah being 900 years old seems excessive. The overnight death of every first-born male in Egypt who didn't have a protective red splash on the doorpost goes against my instinct of likelihood. Shadrach, Meshak and Abednigo walking around in the fiery furnace unscathed stretches credulity if it has to "seem within the realm of the possible to most people".
Moses and the Israelites crossing the dry Red Sea, and the flood of Noah.
Everything else seems within the realm of the possible to most people.
I have slight problems with Jonah surviving for days in the belly of the whale. Eww.
What else, now I'm thinking about it. Methuselah being 900 years old seems excessive. The overnight death of every first-born male in Egypt who didn't have a protective red splash on the doorpost goes against my instinct of likelihood. Shadrach, Meshak and Abednigo walking around in the fiery furnace unscathed stretches credulity if it has to "seem within the realm of the possible to most people".
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Speaking in tongue
Ted;507477 wrote: twizzel:-6
It is not a matter of right belief or having faith that the Bible is the inerrant, absolute word of God but of living in a developing, transforming relationship with the God we see manifested in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. This means having (faith) trust in God.
Shalom
Ted:-6
And I do absolutely.
It is not a matter of right belief or having faith that the Bible is the inerrant, absolute word of God but of living in a developing, transforming relationship with the God we see manifested in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. This means having (faith) trust in God.
Shalom
Ted:-6
And I do absolutely.
Speaking in tongue
twizzel:-6
As do I.
Shalom
Ted:-6
As do I.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
Spot:-6
I would agree with your last post. I would suggest that those stories are ancient myths created to make a theological point. Common sense must prevail.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I would agree with your last post. I would suggest that those stories are ancient myths created to make a theological point. Common sense must prevail.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Speaking in tongue
weeder;393478 wrote: I have heard people speaking in tongues many times. I have also been given "instruction" in how to do it... in a class I took called Power for Abundant Living" Speaking in tongues is the external manifestation of the internal presence of holy spirit. It often is a hoax, just put on as a show. At the Last Supper the apostoles spoke in tongues and those present heard words in their own languages. It was a miracle.In some charasmatic groups tongues is more like a babbling that escapes the lips of believers so overcome with emmotion that they are out of control. It is not frightening, but I agree it is uncomfortable. Tongues is also a form of praying quietly for some. Instead of trying to put feelings into words.... it is a quiet and private utterance of feelings directed to God from the heart of a believer. The gifts of Holy Spirit include Tongues, Interpertation of Tongues, Prophecy, Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom Faith Healing and Miracles.Speaking in tongues out loud is pointless if it cannott be understood by those listening. To me, it has no place in any public gathering. But that is only my opinion. Anything that causes confusion, fear,or doubt is not proof of the presence of God.
in pentecostal christian beleif, they say that they are "saved" only when they speak in tongues and the holy spirit come inside them. sometimes beleif just put up a show to show others that they are saved. this is one reason that i dont belie in people talking in tongues right now. i do beleive that everyone will talk in tongues during the second coming. this is what i think.
in pentecostal christian beleif, they say that they are "saved" only when they speak in tongues and the holy spirit come inside them. sometimes beleif just put up a show to show others that they are saved. this is one reason that i dont belie in people talking in tongues right now. i do beleive that everyone will talk in tongues during the second coming. this is what i think.