Thanks for the reply brother John, but some clarification is in order, I wrote the orignal post not brother Dorrington, he's innocent :-).
Since I've had some requests for my paper on glossa, thought I would just post it below.
In His Grip,
Bob C.
My conclusions from studying the word GLOSSA
By: Bob Cauley
GLOSSA
Glossolalia is the term given to the experience of "speaking in tongues" in the New Testament of the Bible. It is a compound Greek word that comes from GLOSSA ("tongues") - LALIA (speaking). The word GLOSSA, is translated "tongues" in the English version of the Bible. GLOSSA is used 50 times in the New Testament. Ten times it refers to the literal tongue, a few times it is used metaphorically, but at least 35 times it refers to language. GLOSSA, for the most part can be accurately translated "languages" (this may be a clearer rendering than "tongues").
In the second chapter of the book of Acts, at Pentecost, Peter and the other apostles could speak, and people of many languages could hear them in their own native tongues[1], speaking the "wonderful works of God." "Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd come together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Utterly amazed, they asked: 'Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? Parthians, Medes, and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Portus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs - we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!'" (Acts 2:5-11). Several known languages are listed here, and it is apparent that this was a miracle.
INSERTION OF "UNKNOWN"
The translators of the King James Version (KJV), have inserted the helping word "unknown" when used with GLOSSA into six places in 1 Cor. 14 for clarification. This unfortunate insertion has not clarified, but led to some confusion in modern interpretation. The word "unknown" is found nine times in the (KJV). There is textual support for three of these usage's: Acts 17:23, 2 Cor. 6:9, and Gal. 1:22. There is no textual support for the insertion of the word "unknown," that is used in these six other places found in: 1 Cor. 14:2,4,13,14,19 and 27. However, the word "unknown" is not always inserted when translating GLOSSA in the (KJV), sometimes it is omitted, (e.g.) 1 Cor. 14:5 and 14:26. Other translators have at times inserted different helping words for clarification in their translations. For example: Jay P. Green inserts the word "foreign," into 1 Cor. 14:19. I believe there is a modern misinterpretation when studying the usage of "tongues" in the New Testament, and it is somewhat caused from the unfortunate insertion of the word "unknown," several times into the text.
In Acts 2:4 two words HETERAIS and GLOSSAIS are translated "other tongues." The compound word HETEROGLOSSOIS translated "other tongues" is used in 1 Cor. 14:21. In the context of 1 Cor. 14:21, Paul uses "other tongues" to explain the use of the "gift" of "tongues" to the Corinthian church. Paul uses this illustration in 1 Cor. 14:21 of a known foreign language of another kind being spoken. I believe his intention was to demonstrate that "tongues" in the church were known languages, not ecstatic utterances.
The Corinthian Church was a cosmopolitan church. There was a large trading
and shipping port located there. There were foreign peoples there from around the world. Languages being spoken in the Corinthian Church (whether common or foreign) were to be used for several purposes. 1) To spread the Gospel among foreign listeners. 2) Used as a unifying device for the church. 3) The "gift of tongues" or "languages," like all the spiritual "gifts," was to be used to build up or edify the church. 4) Used for service to the church body.
PURPOSE OF TONGUES
EDIFICATION OF CHURCH - NOT INDIVIDUALS
Paul, in writing to correct the Corinthian Church about their worship service, said that the foreign language speaker should seek to uplift the entire church body with a message that unifies and is understandable. He explains the reasoning that all the "gifts" were to be used for service to build up the entire church body. 1 Cor. 14:26 "Let all things be done for edification." Not individual, but corporate collective church edification. [2]The "gifts" were to be executed for purpose, ". . . in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue" 1 Cor. 14:19 (NIV). "Gifts" were to have distinction 1 Cor. 14:7,8. "Gifts" were to bear fruit 1 Cor. 14:6. "But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" 1 Cor. 14:7 (NAS).
Paul, when writing later to the Ephesian church, about a.d. 62, reiterates the purpose of God given gifts. "And he gave some, apostles; and some prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry [service], for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11,12). Also, Paul instructs the Ephesians "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers" (Eph. 4:29).
Some people teach that 1 Cor. supports the use of "tongues" used to edify oneself, as a special personal blessing for individual believers. I believe just the opposite. Paul, chastises the Corinthians for using "tongues" for self edification. "One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying" 1 Cor. 14:4,5 (NAS). "Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers" 1 Cor. 14:22 (NIV). The last part of 1 Cor.14:26 says, ". . . All of these must be done for the [edification (NAS)] strengthening of the church" (NIV).
Languages were to be executed in love, clearly interpreted, completely intelligible, and easily understood by all. "So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air" 1 Cor. 14:9 (NIV). All true spoken languages contain syntax, grammatical structure, and have a communicable meaning. "There are perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the would, and no kind is without meaning" 1 Cor 14:10 (NAS). The Greek word GENOS is
translated "kind" in this verse. It is also used in 1 Cor. 12:10,28 "kinds of languages."
This usage shows that "tongues" have reference to distinct categories (generations, families) of languages. Tongues used here could not have been ecstatic or unknown to the hearers - or those who would receive the message. There is no such thing as various 'kinds" of gibberish. Finally, Paul issues this reminder for order in the church service, "Let all things be done decently and in order." 1 Cor. 14:40
ACTS - WRITTEN AFTER 1 CORINTHIANS
The book of Acts was written by Luke about A.D. 60, several years after the book of 1 Corinthians had been written by Paul, about A.D. 55. Luke, writing under the influence of the Holy Spirit, must have been aware of the Corinthian Church and its problems. If he was aware of two different uses of GLOSSA ("tongues") [foreign or interpretable/translatable language, or ecstatic speech], and had known about a legitimate use and interpretation of the word GLOSSA ("tongues") as ecstatic speech [possibly being used by the Corinthian Church], I think Luke would have clarified this situation, especially in his writing of the book of Acts where spiritual "gifts" are used, and in particular Acts 2 (Pentecost) where known foreign languages and dialects are clearly stated.
Luke did not need to address the problem of two kinds of GlOSSA ("tongues") [known language and unknown ecstatic speech] in the book of Acts, because there is only one "kind" of GLOSSA ("tongues"), which is "language." And language is an intelligible form of communication, not ecstatic utterances for self edification. Besides, writing earlier, Paul had already clarified the use and misuse of this spiritual "gift," in his epistle to the Corinthians.
PURPOSE OF LANGUAGE
The dictionary defines language as: "The organized system of written symbols and vocal sounds with which humans communicate thoughts, ideas, or emotions." The purpose of language is for men to communicate with men.
[3]1 Cor. 12:10 talks of "kinds of tongues" [languages]. As has been expressed earlier, the purpose of human language is for human's. Archeology confirms that language has been the diversifier of men. Pentecost was the unifier. [4] Language can unite or diversify men, according to God's sovereign will. If Angles have a spoken language [5]("Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels. . ." 1 Cor. 13:1), as we understand communicable language, obviously it would be ONE language - because they do not have the terrestrial limitations that men have, nor the diversity.
Consequently, according to this logic, there would not be various "kinds" of Angelic language - there would only be ONE universal Angelic language. Thus said, one could examine Pentecostal "tongues," and they should fall into one of two categories: (1) Known human language or, (2) Angelic language, which would be ONE dialect.
If Pentecostal "tongues" cannot be found in one of the two above categories, then it must be determined that they are unintelligible "gibberish." This "gibberish" could not be equated with 1 Cor. 12:10, because there cannot be various "kinds" of gibberish, there is only one "kind" of gibberish. Gibberish by definition are words that are unintelligible, needlessly obscure, or without coherent meaning: nonsense, jargon, bilge, double-talk, abracadabra, jabber, babble, poppycock, wind, gabble, etc.
However, while trying to understand the motive and use of unintelligible language to communicate to God, I realize that Christians when engaged in prayer, basically communicate with God by the spirit (Jn. 4:24). So theoretically, our communication to God is spiritual and whatever our language (known, unknown, angelic, gibberish etc.), is a moot point. Our language does help men organize and label their thoughts and prayers, but real heart and soul communication of man-to-God takes place - unutterably (Rom. 8:26).
CONCLUSION:
When interpreting the Bible, a good rule is to compare the context of scripture that you want further light on, with similar scripture on the same subject. When comparing the other instances of "tongues" in the Bible (Acts 2,10,19) with 1 Cor. 14, it is apparent that all the other occurrences of "tongues" were always known languages.
At Pentecost, the initial baptism of the Holy Spirit to the Church, there is no question that the "tongues" were known languages or dialects. (Acts 2)
When Cornelius and his house received the Holy Spirit, there was no mention of ecstatic speech. In fact, I believe the story leans toward known languages because the observers understood that they were praising God. "And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." (Acts 10:45-46)
Again, when the Ephesian believers received the Holy Spirit, there was again no mention of ecstatic speech. I believe here that known understandable languages were used, because if it was unintelligible ecstatic speech being used, the hearers would not have understood them as prophesying. "And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied." (Acts 19: 6)
GLOSSA ("tongues") as used in 1 Cor.14 consistently refers to known language. The consensus both from history and the New Testament usage support this.
Regardless of some scattered opinion by lexicographers, a few commentators, and the modern misinterpretation claiming that GLOSSA ("tongues") refers to ecstatic speech - the overwhelming evidence concludes that the word GLOSSA ("tongues") virtually always refers to known languages, throughout the Bible.
My conclusion, and an investigation of the history and usage of the word GLOSSA or "language" (especially as used in 1 Cor. 14), has demonstrated that the word was commonly used in reference to a "known language," rather than "ecstatic speech."
I believe that the central purpose of the "gift of tongues," was to propagate and expedite the Gospel in a known language. The "gift of tongues" was abused in the Corinthian church, and Paul wrote to clarify it's usage and purpose. Paul explained that all the "gifts" were to be used for service to the church body, and were not intended for self-edification (the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement interprets 1 Cor.14 just the opposite).
Luke, aware of the Corinthian problems, writing later, after the fact, goes on to explain the events that happened at Pentecost, and he makes no explanation, provision, exception or allusion to any other kind of "tongues," other than Known languages or dialects - of which he names several. If the main purpose of the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, was to indwell and empower the Church for world evangelization, than it would follow that the "gift of tongues" was a practical gift [to proclaim the Word of God, preaching the Gospel in a known foreign language], to help carry out that end. If this is true, than it would also follow that this same main purpose, should be the reason for the bestowal of this gift, and the other occurrences of "tongues" in the Bible.
The natural and normal intended use of language is for human communication. The modern phenomenon of "tongues" as practiced in the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement is therefore not known human language (this can be quickly proven by linguists); it is not angelic language, because angels would have one [6]universal language - but unintelligible gibberish.
Those involved in the modern "tongues" movement, I think should re-examine their position. A strong argument can be made that the "tongues" practiced today, are not generally known languages, and are not in keeping with the instruction of Paul in 1 Cor. 14. There are some brave souls who have come out of the modern movement, and have changed their belief on the matter; they have spoken and written their testimony's. However, generally it is hard to change ones belief system, after an experience. One should seek sound teaching on a theological basis, before seeking an experience.
"Now brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?" (1 Cor.14:6)
ENDNOTE:
[This paper is the result of some additional and subsequent thoughts on the word Glossa, from a previous word study in the Greek. The original word study is lengthy and somewhat technical, and does not have much meaning to those unfamiliar with the New Testament Koine Greek. This short paper is primarily intended to demonstrate the validity of known languages being used in the early church. It is not a definite, categorical, or final statement on the possibility of mysterious languages, or an exhaustive study and interpretation of every verse on the matter. In fact, only a select few of the verses have been only briefly commented on. Also, in an effort to keep this paper short, other important verses that would have required lengthy discussion, have not been addressed, such as 1 Cor. 14:2+14.
The question of whether the "gift of tongues" passed away after the apostolic age 1 Cor. 13:8,9,10 is another issue that must be addressed separately.
There is also the historical evidence (or lack of evidence) of "tongues," the heretical usage (often cited by tongues advocates, as historical evidence), the counterfeit use, and the demonic. Also, the psychological reasons and explanations of the phenomenon.
The question of speaking in a foreign language as a sign to unbelievers; and weather or not unbelievers (especially unbelieving Jews) were present, are all topics for another discussion.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Some scholars suggest that the miracle was actually in the hearing of the audience, rather than in the voice of the speakers. The languages spoken on the Day of Pentecost were foreign languages unlearned by those who spoke but understood by those who heard them.
[2] Ecstatic speech would not be considered a gift. Speaking in a foreign language was a gift. If you could miraculously speak in a foreign language, you probably wouldn't understand the language yourself, unless you also had the gift of interpretation. These were two separate gifts, both indicating known language - you can't translate gibberish. The gift of interpretation was so that the audience of hearers could also benefit from the exercise of the gift of tongues.
[3] In his commentary on 1 Cor. 12:10, Lenski indicates that the nature of tongue-speaking in Corinth is to be ascertained not from 1 Corinthians but from the Book of Acts. In support of this position he says, Luke is the one who fully describes what the tongues are while Paul takes for granted that his readers know what they are and therefore offers no description. "Luke writes for a reader (Theophilus) who may never have heard of this gift, at least may never have seen this gift in operation. Paul writes for readers who have often heard members of their own congregation speak in tongues. This is decisive as to the Scriptural starting point
The nature of glossolalia is determined by the following factors. The words "glossa" and "dialectos" indicate a language. The languages spoken on the Day of Pentecost were foreign languages unlearned by those who spoke but understood by those who heard them.
[4] In the early days of the church, the "gift of tongues," sometimes called glossolalia, was practiced. In the book of Acts, the coming of the Holy Spirit at the great pilgrim feast of Pentecost is detailed. Some years after Pentecost occurred, Luke described this remarkable event as a mighty miracle in which the Spirit came with a great sound of wind and the appearance of tongues like fire. Suddenly, the confusion of different languages, which had troubled humanity since the tower of Babel, was overcome.
In his church history, Philip Schaff addresses the importance of the correlation between what happened at Pentecost and at the tower of Babylon. He speaks of the reversal of Babylon at Pentecost [both places speaking of known languages], he said it was "A symbolical anticipation and prophetic announcement of the universalness of the Christian religion, which was to be proclaimed in all the languages of the earth and to unite all nations in one kingdom of Christ."
[5] I do not believe that man should attempt communication with Angeles. The only supernatural or paranormal communication man must seek is with God. This excludes all else (angels, demons, spirit guides, deceased spirits, etc.).
[6] We should not attempt communication with angels, even if we are deluded to think we understand their language [and this is assuming they have a spoken language].
--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com
To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace