Has anyone ever considered the modern translations of the Holy Bible as a form of the gift of tongues?
373115
Tongues, as related in the Bible, were actual languages spoken in the day, in different parts of the world.  For the apostles to relate the story of Christ to the speakers of these languages, the apostles had to have the ability to speak to those people.  \nIn churches where 'tongues' are spoken, if you could record these utterances and take them to language experts, you would find (I believe) no actual language patterns.\nThe modern translations of the Holy Bible are a gift to those of us who can't read or speak Hebrew or Greek, and are done by teams of language experts who interpret the original text as nearly as possible to English.  In the Quest Study Bible, New Internation Version translation, notes are made where there is a question or multiple meaning to the original word. \nI strongly recommend this book to everyone.  If you are new to bible study, it outlines study for you. If you are a long-time studier, it will help immensely with time lines, background info about the culture and practices of the times.  To start verse I, chaper I of Genesis, is the most discourageing way to start reading the Bible.  All the begats put me to sleep.\nIn closing, beware of people who say they can speak in tongues (ask them what language they use), and yes, the English translation is a gift.  We can read for ourselves, and don't have to rely on anyone else to tell us His word.
980018
This so-called "question" seems to focus on "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures", which is distributed by Jehovah's Witnesses. There are more than 130 million copies of this modern-language bible in print, in dozens of languages.\nhttp://watchtower.org/languages.htm\n\nThe entire text of NWT is freely available at the official website of Jehovah's Witnesses, and a personal printed copy can be requested at no charge:\nhttp://watchtower.org/bible/\nhttps://watch002.securesites.net/contact/submit.htm\nhttp://watchtower.org/how_to_contact_us.htm\n\n\nJehovah's Witnesses certainly like NWT, but they are happy to use any translation which an interested person may prefer, and in fact Jehovah's Witnesses themselves distribute other translations besides NWT. Jehovah's Witnesses attach no particular infallibility or inspiration to NWT.\n\nSince the same manuscripts used by the NWT translators are still widely available for study, and since there are dozens of alternate translations for comparison, anyone who chooses to use NWT does so informedly. \n\nIt seems that the vast majority of the criticism against the New World Translation is actually as a proxy for blind hatred against Jehovah's Witnesses. The hatred must be "blind" since secular experts of biblical Hebrew and Greek have consistently refused to condemn any particular verse or phrase as an unacceptable translation. Instead, it is religionists with preconceived theologies who bigotedly insist upon particular wordings, since these are necessary to prop up the shakey tenets of their false worship.\n\n(2 Timothy 4:3-5) For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories. You, though, keep your senses in all things, suffer evil, do the work of an evangelizer, fully accomplish your ministry.\n\nIt seems signficant that the relatively small religion of Jehovah's Witnesses are the ones best known for their worldwide preaching work. Yet Jesus commanded that ALL who would call themselves "Christian" perform this public work:\n\n(Matthew 28:19,20) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.\n\nLearn more:\nhttp://watchtower.org/library/pr/article_04.htm\nhttp://watchtower.org/e/na/\nhttp://watchtower.org/e/20020915/article_01.htm\nhttp://www.watchtower.org/e/20050715/article_02.htm
922805
No. \n\nThe original language documents have not changed. The Dead Sea Scrolls helped prove this. The scrolls testify to the accuracy of the people who copied and recopied the Scriptures over the centuries. Despite minor errors, they show us that the Bible has not changed since the first and second centuries.\n\nWith love in Christ.
300429
It is not. Back then, each copy of the Bible had to be handwritten when they were reproduced. This means the scribes had free will to add/change anything they wanted. Also the Bible was translated from Greek and Hebrew to English. So its changed a lot, because there are no originals in existence. KJV went through the hands of countless scribes before being translated.  Even the dead sea scrolls are not the originals, just really old, close to original copies. And no, they're not in English
865845
Dear ES,\n\nI agree with you and I enjoy reading it and giving away copies of the Bible.\n\nLong before I read the Bible from cover-to-cover I intended to re-write the Bible and take out all of the sexist language.  What a joke that was!  When I finally read it I didn't change it but it sure did change me!\n\nOne wonderful thing I noticed was that I had the feeling that it was written directly to me, even though I know it was written long before I was born.  It reminds me of looking at a photograph when it seems as though the subject is looking right back at you.\n\nEven though there have been several translations of the Bible they all say just about the same thing.  However I've seen a few that are not divinely inspired and there is no sense of the Living Word of God.\n\nYes, it is fascinating to look at the prophecies and realize that Jesus was the only person who ever had his biography written before He was born!
427902
The Bible claims to be actual communication from God to humanity. Notice these biblical passages:\n\nAll Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 \n\nAbove all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:20-21 \n\nThe Bible claims to be the very Word of God (verbum Dei), indeed, the very words of God (verba Dei). But this claim often raises a number of objections. \n\nObjection #1: The Bibles we have today are nothing like the biblical books as they were originally written. \nThis is a real concern people have. The question of whether or not the Bible was God’s Word 2,000 years ago is irrelevant if the Bible we read today is substantially different from what was originally written. Until the invention of the printing press around 1450, all literature was hand-copied and scribes could make mistakes in copying. It’s hard to know if errors are present with many ancient works simply because few early hand-written copies exist. But this is not a major concern with the biblical documents: \n\n1. There are at least 24,800 surviving partial or complete manuscripts of New Testament books today. By comparison, the next largest number is for Homer’s Iliad, with only 643 surviving manuscripts. We have only 7 copies of Pliny’s History and only 10 of Caesar’s Gallic Wars―but we don’t hesitate to trust them. \n\n2. Furthermore, the New Testament has unusually early manuscripts compared with other ancient literature. Our earliest copy of Pliny’s History dates to 750 years after Pliny’s death. A lot can happen in 750 years. And the earliest copy of Gallic Wars was copied 1,000 years after Caesar’s death. By contrast, some early New Testament fragments date to within 30 years of their first writing, as with the John Rylands papyrus found in Egypt. There simply wasn’t enough time between the original writing and our earliest manuscripts to allow for much corruption. \n\n3. There are over 84,000 quotations from the New Testament (mainly from sermons) dating to the early centuries of the Church. In fact, even if we didn’t have a single manuscript of the Bible today, we could reconstruct all but 11 verses of the entire New Testament from material within 150 to 200 years from the time of Christ. \n\n4. Similarly, with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1950s, we now have copies of the entire Old Testament from before the time of Christ―complete copies of every book except Esther.\n\nModern translations of the Bible (New International Version, New American Standard Bible, etc.) are translated directly from these earliest biblical manuscripts. \n\nObjection #2: The Bible is just a book of fairy-tales. Its account is not historically reliable. \nWhile there are letters and songs and laws and doctrinal teachings in the Bible, the most common genre within the Scripture is history. Observers point out that the Bible is an historical document in that it consistently gives accurate information on the geography, chronology, people, places, customs, nations and events recorded within it.\n\nThe Bible is therefore unusual compared to other human religious literature. The Book of Mormon, even though relatively recent, nevertheless reads like a cheap nineteenth century American gothic novel. It describes an entire pre-Columbian civilization which shows no signs of ever having existed. There simply never was a highly advanced Jewish civilization in ancient New York. There is today, but not before Columbus. Or compare the Bible with the Hindu Vedas, which explain that the moon is 150,000 miles higher than the sun and shines with its own light (like a big GE light bulb), adding that the eart
49145
Heh, heh... thanks bro. ;)\n\nI have seen some rare textual changes that have changed the meaning or even elimination of a word because they could not see how it fits. Hebrew letters can look very close to one another, much like our "l" and "i". So any distortion in the leather parchment could be a problem or the flaking of the ink could cause problems as well.\nMy mentor once told me that when the military creates a complex code, they transmit it with parity, or multiple times, so that if the coded message is in any way garbled, they can compare it to earlier or later transmissions. The Bible does the same thing by repeating the important messages several times. This is why Deuteronomy is called Deuteronomy. It's "repeating what we already know is true".\nCan these people explain to me why the entire 2,000 year old Isaiah scroll found in Qumran is virtually identical with the modern copies found in every synagogue in the world?\nRemember that Revelation carries an eternal curse of damnation for anyone who adds or subtracts from the text of scripture, and I do not think King James was hoping for political advantage at the expense of his soul.\nToday, we still have the original Hebrew and Greek text. Changing the scriptures would offer us ZERO political gain. Yet is still translates the same as the original King James, only with todays vernacular. \nI wonder if these people even research beyond their own notions. Do they have such skepticism when they read their dosage instructions for medication?
370808
Short answer: Yes, it is the Word of God.\n\nLong answer:  The Holy Bible is the Word of God, handed down to many people over thousands of years, compiled, translated, translated, translated, interpreted (if you turn protestant) and truncated), translated, translated, and translated.  However, it still remains the Word of God.  Only the exact words changed, while the message (the most important thing) stays the same.
167758
Only in a figurative, not a literal or actual, sense. There is much beautiful language in the Bible.
807381
They are under the delusion that they are "filled with the Holy Spirit" when they are merely filled with emotion, and they think they are speaking with a language of the angels.  But linguists have studied glossolalia, and find NO syntax at all.  It's just nonsensical babbling.  It represents the regression to a pre-verbal mentality.
303211
I always was told that speaking in tongues was the evidence, but it was not until I had an experience like described in the bible.  It says in the bible that fire rested on the follower's heads.  My experience was similar, but the flame rested in my heart.  After that I began to change.  I could like, see people through God's eyes, feel his love for them.  All this was with my heart.  It still amazes me how God loves people, all people.  My behavior changed.  My desires changed.  I often have states of bliss where I feel engulfed in love.  I can see why the holy spirit is referred to as the "comforter".  To me this was the baptism of the holy spirit.
686693
I have read some in translation.\n\n"If so, what is your opinion on the similarities between them and the Bible?"\n\nClearly the authors of the Bible drew upon a stock of pre-existing stories and oral traditions in order to express their theological views.
690786
Acts relates tongues and prophecy with the instances of Holy Spirit filling.  Paul, however, asks the question "will all speak with tongues?" having an implied answer of 'no'.  No matter what physical evidences one may manifest... the fruit of the Spirit growing in a changed heart is by far the most convincing evidence of Holy Spirit filling.
741594
it is a virtue that happened in Pentecost in which tongues of flame took over the disciples and they started to speak in different tongues....i the bible,, some people claim to do it ...still a virtue
205676
I have many, many Bibles and often use them to compare scriptures which I'm studying.  But for reading and teaching I prefer a modern language text, and one that is TRANSLATED (from original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic) as opposed to one that is a VERSION.  My two favorites are The New World Translation and the American Standard Bible.  Also I prefer ones that have footnotes and cross references, which I use a great deal.
1177688
It depends. I spoke to our Parish priest about that, (^_^) and he said that it was INSPIRED in the prophets who wrote it, so in reality it was not really what Jesus exactly says (or said).\n \n(^_^)
659959
yes, i have. a lot. so if i listed all the circumstances we'd be here a while. so i'll give you the situation with a good friend of mine. well, my best friend really. she's dead now (this past march...semi collided with her friend's car). when she speaks in tongues all the time i don't know WHAT she's saying obviously. i've heard that people who speak in tongues know what the subject is that they're talking about but not what they're saying. it's a spirit to God thing that they're not fully aware of. when my friend spoke in tongues the time that stands out the most was while i was trying to do something that was right and it was VERY hard for me. so she was praying for me in the "spirit language" as tongues is also called.