Giuseppe wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 10:29 am
Galatians is a good evidence for that.
1 Cor 14.26-33a for glossolalia.
Note that the argument stands beyond the authenticity or less of the epistles.
I am curious to know why Kunigunde thinks that "Mark" was a genius who wrote of his own hand the
entire gospel, by deriving only from Jewish scriptures
+ Paul
+ (
if Kunigunde is historicist/possibilist) a vague/abstract memory of a historical Jesus,
...when Schmidt has proved beyond any doubt that in Mark 1-13 the string is too much subtle to have the pearls through it produced by the same author.
That word isn't used in Berean, it translates the various forms of γλώσ with 'tongue'. 1 Cor only then:
Chapter 12 Spiritual Gifts
10 and to another working of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another distinguishing of spirits, and to a different one various kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.
28 And some indeed God has appointed in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, various kinds of tongues.
30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
Chapter 13 Love
1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become a sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.
8 Love never fails; but if there are prophesies, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will be ceased; if there is knowledge it will pass away.
Chapter 14 Prophecy and Tongues
2 For the one speaking in a tongue speaks not to men, but to God. For no one hears, but in the Spirit he utters mysteries.
4 The one speaking in a tongue edifies himself, but the one prophesying edifies the church.
5 Now I desire you all to speak in tongues, but rather that you should prophesy. Now the one prophesying is greater than the one speaking in tongues, unless he should interpret, so that the church might receive edification.
6 But now brothers, if I should come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you, unless I should speak to you either in revelation, or in knowledge, or in prophecy, or in teaching?
9 So also you, unless you give intelligible speech with the tongue, how will it be known what is being spoken? For you will be speaking into the air.
13 Therefore he who speaks in a tongue, let him pray that he might interpret.
14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
18 I thank God, speaking in tongues more than all of you.
19 But in the church, I desire to speak five words with my mind, that also I might instruct others, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
21 In the Law it has been written: “By other tongues, and by other lips, I will speak to this people, and not even thus will they hear Me, says the Lord.”a
22 So then, tongues are for a sign, not to those believing, but to the unbelieving; but prophecy is not to the unbelieving, but to the believing.
23 Therefore if the whole church gathers together in one place and all should speak in tongues, but uninstructed ones or unbelievers come in, will not they say that you are mad?
26 What then is it, brothers? When you may come together, each has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.
27 If anyone speaks with a tongue, let it be by two or the most three, and in turn; and let one interpret.
39 So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues.
I don't see where Paul states that Jesus spoke to him in tongue(s), either directly or indirectly - nor does he elaborate on the phenomenon.
Who can speak in tongues, when, how?
More on point to the topic:
28 And some indeed God has appointed in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, various kinds of tongues.
It would seem that Paul puts the apostles at the very first place, and those speaking in tongues at the very last - yet your author claims that the last prevailed over the first?