It would help explain why Paul would say something like "no man understands" while Luke gives us the first instance of SIT, where everyone understands these babbling apostles.
Is it possible that Luke meant known human languages, but Paul did not?
To your point, Acts 2 seems to be xenolalia or xenoglossia.
Acts 2 certainly does refer to xenoglossia or xenolalia (foreign language/foreign speaking).
The challenge then is, what is Paul talking about with glossolalia? He doesn't use that exact word, but the exact words he does use correspond to it (glōssais lalein) to the exent that, I think, for our purposes, there's no practical distinction. He's talking about speaking in languages.
I'm not really sure what to make of my overall question. Is Paul talking about indecipherable babbling that only God knows the meaning to?
And come on, think about it: what would be the POINT of such a thing? Perfect prayer? We don't know what to pray for, so we babble and the right words are supplied by God to articulate what he already knows and we still don't even after having prayed? So God can act on our prayer now even though we don't even know that we prayed it? But it was perfect? That's not a prayer. That's an incantation. THAT MAKES NO BLOODY SENSE!
It's like the scene in Aladdin where the genie needs Aladdin to articulate a wish but Aladdin is unconscious (having just passed out while drowning). So the genie lifts Aladdin, whose head drops down, which the genie reads as a yes and grants the wish.
It was a cheat. Aladdin never wished to be rescued. The genie did that himself.
Same with SIT as intercessory prayer. You're not praying for anything. God (the genie) knew the need before. You did nothing to contribute to his understanding of the situation or your desire for him to intervene. And he took your completely irrelevant action as a plea to intervene because he knew that's what was needed.
Hey, if he knew what was needed and was willing to intervene, what did he need your completely unconscious prayer for?
Paul had παιδεία (paideia). He had training in logic, rhetoric, philosophy, theology. He learned HOW (aytch-oh-double-you) to develop and construct persuasive arguments. The perfect prayer and all the rest of it are concessions ahead of his argument. Classic steel-manning. He was skilled at this.
Sometimes, when reading Paul, I can hear him yelling at these people. And I can hear a sarcastic, hyperbolic condescension - a rhetorical device to persuade. "I thank God that I speak glossais more than all of you...[but that's neither here nor there because it's better to speak five understandable words the ten thousand logous en glosse!]"
Clarity, comprehension, understanding, these were the most important things for Paul, not glossolalia. Vitctor got it wrong. Again.
Hadn't he already spent time in Corinth teaching and preaching? This issue never came up? "Oh, I forgot to tell you, keep the babbling to a minimum, because people on the street will hear your incomprehensible lo shontas, and it's not a good look."
Recommended Posts
waysider
I moved recently, so my PFAL materials are still packed up. I'll see if I can get them back out this weekend.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
To your point, Acts 2 seems to be xenolalia or xenoglossia.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Acts 2 certainly does refer to xenoglossia or xenolalia (foreign language/foreign speaking).
The challenge then is, what is Paul talking about with glossolalia? He doesn't use that exact word, but the exact words he does use correspond to it (glōssais lalein) to the exent that, I think, for our purposes, there's no practical distinction. He's talking about speaking in languages.
I'm not really sure what to make of my overall question. Is Paul talking about indecipherable babbling that only God knows the meaning to?
And come on, think about it: what would be the POINT of such a thing? Perfect prayer? We don't know what to pray for, so we babble and the right words are supplied by God to articulate what he already knows and we still don't even after having prayed? So God can act on our prayer now even though we don't even know that we prayed it? But it was perfect? That's not a prayer. That's an incantation. THAT MAKES NO BLOODY SENSE!
It's like the scene in Aladdin where the genie needs Aladdin to articulate a wish but Aladdin is unconscious (having just passed out while drowning). So the genie lifts Aladdin, whose head drops down, which the genie reads as a yes and grants the wish.
It was a cheat. Aladdin never wished to be rescued. The genie did that himself.
Same with SIT as intercessory prayer. You're not praying for anything. God (the genie) knew the need before. You did nothing to contribute to his understanding of the situation or your desire for him to intervene. And he took your completely irrelevant action as a plea to intervene because he knew that's what was needed.
Hey, if he knew what was needed and was willing to intervene, what did he need your completely unconscious prayer for?
Make it make sense.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Paul had παιδεία (paideia). He had training in logic, rhetoric, philosophy, theology. He learned HOW (aytch-oh-double-you) to develop and construct persuasive arguments. The perfect prayer and all the rest of it are concessions ahead of his argument. Classic steel-manning. He was skilled at this.
Sometimes, when reading Paul, I can hear him yelling at these people. And I can hear a sarcastic, hyperbolic condescension - a rhetorical device to persuade. "I thank God that I speak glossais more than all of you...[but that's neither here nor there because it's better to speak five understandable words the ten thousand logous en glosse!]"
Clarity, comprehension, understanding, these were the most important things for Paul, not glossolalia. Vitctor got it wrong. Again.
Hadn't he already spent time in Corinth teaching and preaching? This issue never came up? "Oh, I forgot to tell you, keep the babbling to a minimum, because people on the street will hear your incomprehensible lo shontas, and it's not a good look."
Edited by Nathan_JrGloves
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.