PDA

View Full Version : An Update on the strange meaning of "tongue" in 1Cor 14:2



RedemptionAddict
Jan 26th 2010, 03:28 AM
Hey guys a few weeks back I had posted a question about the Greek word used in 1Cor 14:2 the singular "tongue." There was a rumor I heard it was a strange nearly unknown singular word that boggled translators causing them to put "unknown" in front of it. Apparently this word was unwriteable and more like a "guttural" sound that Paul was referring to.

Anyway, upon submitting it to you guys for review I was told by multiple Greek students the assesment was inaccurate.

Well, I tracked down the source of this viewpoint. The guy's name is Spiros Zodhiates a mature Greek scholar who wrote a commentary on 1Cor 14 and published it in 1974 called

"Tongues? An Exegical Commentary on 1Cor 12-14"

The book is hard to track down but I managed to find an old one on Amazon and ordered it.

Anyway, I said I would return with the source----so there you go.

Any additional comments are appreciated-this is a work in progress for me.

roaring tiger
Jan 26th 2010, 05:21 AM
Hi!!!RedemptionAddict,

1 Cor. 14: 2 Right, this does not refer to any language or dialect of man.It refer to 2Cor.12: 4 How he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which is not lawfull for a man to utter.

It also bear record by John in Rev.10: 4 And when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write: and heard a voice from heaven saying unto me,Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered,

and write them not.

This was also given in The Acts 2: 4 And they were filled with Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the spirit gave them utterance.

In OT it was also recorded in Ezek. 2: 9-10 And when I looked, behold an hand was sent unto me; and, lo, a roll of book was therein.

10] And he spread it before me; and it was written within and without; and there was written therein lamentation, and mourning, and woe.

Zeph. 3: 9 For then I will turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent.

Ps. 56: 10, 4 In God will I praise his word: in the Lord will I praise his word.

v. 4] In God I will praise his word, in God I had put my trust; I will not fear what flesh can do unto me.

Thank you and God Bless./RT.

RedemptionAddict
Jan 26th 2010, 05:39 AM
Fascinating scriptures. Thanks

Steven3
Jan 28th 2010, 04:02 AM
Hi ReAd :)
There was a rumor I heard it was a strange nearly unknown singular word that boggled translatorsTranslators are unlikely to be boggled :) the NT is written in simple Greek and almost all the words are well documented from Jewish Greek and Classical Greek sources.

This is just KJV putting in [unknown] to make sense:
1Co14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
it's not boggled, it's simply to mark out Corinth-tongues (glossolalia, praise tongues) from Acts-tongues (xenoglossa, real languages).

BroRog
Jan 28th 2010, 04:28 AM
Hi ReAd :)Translators are unlikely to be boggled :) the NT is written in simple Greek and almost all the words are well documented from Jewish Greek and Classical Greek sources.

This is just KJV putting in [unknown] to make sense:
1Co14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
it's not boggled, it's simply to mark out Corinth-tongues (glossolalia, praise tongues) from Acts-tongues (xenoglossa, real languages).

Not so. Again, the word is exactly the same in each case.

RedemptionAddict
Jan 28th 2010, 04:36 AM
Well the book is on the way. But the guy is a Greek scholar. If I get the book and he really does say this then to me that makes it pretty solid. If you can't trust a Greek scholar . . . Who can you trust ;)

roaring tiger
Jan 28th 2010, 06:09 AM
Hi ReAd :)Translators are unlikely to be boggled :) the NT is written in simple Greek and almost all the words are well documented from Jewish Greek and Classical Greek sources.

This is just KJV putting in [unknown] to make sense:
1Co14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
it's not boggled, it's simply to mark out Corinth-tongues (glossolalia, praise tongues) from Acts-tongues (xenoglossa, real languages).

Hi!!!Steven3,

I don't speak neither understand Jewish Greek or Classical Greek but I don't agree with your explanation that KJV made the putting [unknown] before word tongue,because the verse will be vague of the true meaning.

Without this word { unknown] 1 cor.14: 2 For he that speaketh in an ------ tongue speaketh not unto man, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

How could it happen that you speak in tongue and there are no man could understand you?

Thanks and God Bless./ RT.

BroRog
Jan 28th 2010, 03:39 PM
Hi!!!Steven3,

I don't speak neither understand Jewish Greek or Classical Greek but I don't agree with your explanation that KJV made the putting [unknown] before word tongue,because the verse will be vague of the true meaning.

Without this word { unknown] 1 cor.14: 2 For he that speaketh in an ------ tongue speaketh not unto man, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

How could it happen that you speak in tongue and there are no man could understand you?

Thanks and God Bless./ RT.

What Paul means is that no one locally can understand, not that no man anywhere in the world can understand.

Steven3
Jan 29th 2010, 03:23 AM
Hi RT :)
Hi!!!Steven3,
I don't speak neither understand Jewish Greek or Classical Greek but I don't agree with your explanation that KJV made the putting [unknown] before word tongue,because the verse will be vague of the true meaning.Fortunately you don't need to understand Greek, there are lots of tools which help the normal reader see that the word is inserted.
i. look in a KJV which uses italics for inserted words and you'll see the word is italic
ii. Strong's
iii. Young's
iv. Diaglott/Interlinear.
v. websites like blueletterbible.org



Without this word { unknown] 1 cor.14: 2 For he that speaketh in an ------ tongue speaketh not unto man, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. How could it happen that you speak in tongue and there are no man could understand you?Because the tongue is unknown, hence the KJV translators, correctly, adding in the word in italics.

Whether no man understands it would indicate glossolalia (my reading) or simply that it was Eskimo (some others' reading) doesn't change the fact that KJV is correct to add in "unknown" here. Although even without "unknown" it is clear from context.
God bless :)
s

Steven3
Jan 29th 2010, 03:25 AM
Hi Bro Rog
What Paul means is that no one locally can understand, not that no man anywhere in the world can understand.So it's Eskimo or something more likely in the Middle East, like Lyconian - which Paul couldn't understand (Acts 14:11). Yes this is one theory, but try applying that Lyconian idea through the whole chapter. It's possible, but less likely than the simpler explanation.

Steven3
Jan 29th 2010, 03:26 AM
Hi Re.Ad.

Well the book is on the way. But the guy is a Greek scholar. If I get the book and he really does say this then to me that makes it pretty solid. If you can't trust a Greek scholar . . . Who can you trust ;)Zodhiates was a bit of an outsider from the mainstream Greek scholarship set (http:// (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_Zodhiates)en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_Zodhiates)Zodhiates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiros_Zodhiates)) so it'll certainly be interesting to see what he says, that's a book that doesn't feature in bibliographies of other writers. However the problem is that this isn't particularly a linguistic issue. The translation isn't in dispute, simply the reading. Let us know :)