Define the angel tongue of I Cor 13

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Bartimaeus, May 25, 2008.

  1. Bartimaeus

    Bartimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    We were on another thread discussing private prayer language and I did not want to hijack the thread.

    Please give us scripture for there being any other tongue that an angel can speak other than the one of whom the angel was speaking to.

    This invitation is kindly given to those folks who believe in (estatic utterances).

    Thank you kindly.
    Bartimaeus
     
    #1 Bartimaeus, May 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2008
  2. Bartimaeus

    Bartimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    The difinition of angel tongue (s)

    I guess I have no takers. It has been a few hours now.

    Bartimaeus
     
  3. JerryL

    JerryL
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    972
    Likes Received:
    0
    You would think the proponents would give a definition.
     
  4. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    You would think, wouldn't you.
     
  5. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,065
    Likes Received:
    214
    When I was in Mainz, Germany; :praying: I soke a little German. Does that count?
     
  6. RevJWWhiteJr

    RevJWWhiteJr
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Angelic tongue

    There is a problem answering the question you have asked from the passage you have referenced.

    1 Corinthians 13:1. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

    To my knowledge, there is no passage in the scripture pointing to the teaching you describe. Paul in these passages is making a point through illustration. Several of the items mentioned in these verses he personally was not in possession of or was incapable of accomplishing himself, he Is speaking hypothetically. Although we can assume angels have a communication process, but do not speak English, German, French, ect, ect, we can also assume there is an heavenly or angelic language of some type, since the spiritual existed before the physical was spoken into being. These passages do not confirm an angelic language that mankind is capable of possessing, nor does it suggest or support the existence of “unknown tongues” or otherwise “prayer language”. Not that such do not exist, just that these verse are not teaching those concepts.
     
  7. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is typically another aspect I bring up as well. Good point.
     
    #7 Allan, May 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2008
  8. Bartimaeus

    Bartimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Definition

    Bro Allen, that was an excellent expose' on tongues in the thread on PPL.
    Bro JW, I think you nailed it to the wall, at least on the text of I Cor 13. Can you please advise of what you mean in your last statement. Do you believe in the "tongues" of the neo-pentecostal movement and private prayer language?

    I say Amen! to both of you men.

    Those guys in WoF have put it out that Satan is the god of the air and he snatches the prayers of the saints before they reach heaven for God to hear (and there are enough shallow people around to believe this garbage). BUT....NOW......LISTEN......... if you pray in another "tnogue" the devil can't cipher the prayer and mess with it. Now I've heard it all. Just another lie that they tell to dupe their people down the road of Apostacy.

    Bartimaeus
     
    #8 Bartimaeus, May 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2008
  9. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Paul was making use of hyperbole, pure and simple.

    As for the neo-pentecostal movement and private prayer language, I take a very conservative stance. "Tongues" as practiced by many by gibbering aroung in a church service, is nothing more than a show of the flesh. I have spoken to many pentecostals who confided that they practice tongues so they will be ready when the "Spirit" hits them. Sad, really. A wide-spread case of "monkey see, monkey do."

    A private prayer language is something that I see no basis for. Prayer is speaking to God, praising Him, bringing Him our hurts and needs. If we have no idea what we are supposedly saying, we are not communicating with Him. God may know our hearts, but He wants us to know Him, and know Him intimately. how can we know Him if we ar shouting gibberish at Him?
     
  10. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like the way one pastor put it:

    I do have a private prayer language that I use every day and sometimes more than once a day. It is in my prayer closet on my knees and begin in such a manner "My heavenly Father.." and end in the same private prayer language "..I pray these things in the authority and power of my Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ - Amen." And friends niether you nor I need no other language than that for prayer!
     
  11. nunatak

    nunatak
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    445
    Likes Received:
    0
    There should be order in the church. We should pray privately. Nowhere in scripture is tongues commanded. And yet, that is exactly what the pentecostals do, when they "require" their people to speak in tongues. Just another heresy.
     
  12. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't the fact that Paul distinguishes between the "tongues of men" and the "tongues of angels" demonstrate they have different languages?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  13. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure does, canadyjd. Some spoke Greek, some spoke Arabic, and others spoke other languages. "Tongues" does not mean something unknown.

    Paul spoke of an unknown tongue, but never said anything about gibberish. Zulu would be an unknown tongue to me, but it would still be a real language.
     
  14. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the tongues of angels were the same as the tongues of men, there would be no need to make a distinction.

    It is possible that the people speaking in tongues at Corinth were claiming it was an angelic language, and Paul was using their own terminology to make his point that any language, angelic or human, that was not accompanied by love, was worthless.

    It does seem probable that Paul uses the description of "tongues of angels" as a reference to the estatic utterances that some were engaging in, since that is the context of chapters 12-14. What the origin of the phrase is, I cannot determine.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  15. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,270
    Likes Received:
    777
    It was hyperbole or an extreme example used to make a point. No where else in scripture is it ever suggested that anyone spoke in tongues of angels.
     
  16. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    I vote for hyperbole too.
     
  17. Bartimaeus

    Bartimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Define Angel tongue

    Canadjyd,
    I think I understand the circumtance now. You presume the premise of "estatic utterances" to be scriptural. Let's start there.
    First of all, as students of the scripture we must understand that all experience must be defined and examined in the light of scripture. We Do Not interpret, define or examine scripture in the light of experience.
    Do you agree?

    Secondly, using the law of first mention, the use of the word tongue in its first location of the scripture is:
    Gen 10:
    1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.
    2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.
    3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.
    4 And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.
    5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his TONGUE, after their families, in their nations.

    This is clearly meaning a known spoken language. The word "tongue"
    throughout the scripture up to the book of Acts defines this word as a spoken, known language. Then in the book of Acts once again verifies and stays consistent with the original definition.

    Do you understand this? Do you have a problem with this? If there is another issue that I have failed to relate or point out, please advise.
    Where do you find the basis for your "estatic utterances" in the scripture?

    Bartimaeus
     
  18. RevJWWhiteJr

    RevJWWhiteJr
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Angelic and/or unknown tongues

    :praying: Years ago I had done an extensive amount of Bible study on the subject of tongues, other tongues, unknown tongues, ect, which included the subject of the possibility of an angelic tongue or language due to the mention of it in scripture. I discovered a host of information of course, that is too exhaustive to discuss here. Suffice to say, although I believe in the teachings of 1st Corinthians 14 (which is controversial enough in and of itself), I do not believe a “biblical unknown tongue” as is thought to be practiced today in some churches. The tongue that was experienced on the day of Pentecost was not of the same nature. On that day “every man understood in his own language”. That was not an unknown tongue, it was a universally understood by all tongue.
    I believe 1st Corinthians 13/14 as I believe the entire scripture. I have never experienced an angelic, other, or unknown tongue myself. Neither do I have a prayer language beyond the Lords prayer and the presence of the Holy Spirit through which all must pass to communicate with the Father who sits on the throne in the throne room with Jesus at his right hand. Many of the practices of today’s churches are a slap in the face to the teachings of God’s Holy Word. In essence they hold their "experience" ("I know its real, I experienced it") over the Word of God as authority, whether they know it or will admit it, or not. That is one of the most dangerous philosophies that exist. RevJW. :praying:
     
    #18 RevJWWhiteJr, May 28, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 28, 2008
  19. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    First of all, you don't understand and I presume nothing. You should read the posts a little more closely before you presume to lecture someone on the meaning of scripture.

    Paul discribes the "estatic utterances" in I Cor. 1:12-14 in various ways. We know what they are and that is why we are having the discussion. Some Corinthians were speaking in an "unknown" language which no one else could interpret. His concern was not to prove the experience to be invalid, but to ensure the fellowship was not disrupted by it. That, also, is clear from the text.

    I don't believe "estatic utterances" are the "tongues" referred to throughout scripture, particularly in Acts, where they are clearly known languages.

    I have never claimed they were, so clearly you don't understand, or you haven't really read what I have posted when you state I presume the "estatic utterances" are scriptural.

    I, personally, don't believe that the Apostle Paul thought the use of the "estatic utterance" was a legitimate gift of Holy Spirit.

    He recognized; which you and others apparently are unwilling to recognize; that he could not look into their spirit and see if they were actually speaking to God or not.

    He even conceded the possibility that their "estatic utterances" were valid in I Cor 14:17: "you are giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified."

    Paul, therefore, gave instructions concerning its use in the church. If there were none to interpret, he was to keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.

    Although I don't believe the "estatic utterances" are the "tongues" referred to elsewhere in scripture, I, as with Paul, cannot look into someone's spirit and tell them they are not really speaking to God.

    I believe this is a matter of Christian conscience and Christian liberty. As long as it is done privately, not in the church, I must leave it in the hands of God.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  20. Bartimaeus

    Bartimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Canadyjd

    As is clearly eveident by your post, you are very "touchy" on the subject.
     

Share This Page

Loading...