<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: D. A. Carson on Private Prayer Language</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/</link>
	<description>A commentary on theology, politics, and culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:07:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve small</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-66709</link>
		<dc:creator>steve small</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 16:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-66709</guid>
		<description>Denny,
As a fellow DTS guy, I too was a cessationist with all the arguments. After further study, and help from Sam Storms, D.A. Carson, and others, I began praying for this gift of tongues. On October 12, 2008 I received it. 

I&#039;ve practiced it daily ever since (missing only a few times). God uses this to build me up so that I can pastor more effectively. Although, I haven&#039;t shared it publicly with the congregation for the same reasons a professor would not want to. People growing from our ministries would be too freak out (as I would&#039;ve been). Therefore, I practice it in private, and they receive the benefits.

I thank God that I speak in tongues.

www.1ccc.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Denny,<br />
As a fellow DTS guy, I too was a cessationist with all the arguments. After further study, and help from Sam Storms, D.A. Carson, and others, I began praying for this gift of tongues. On October 12, 2008 I received it. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve practiced it daily ever since (missing only a few times). God uses this to build me up so that I can pastor more effectively. Although, I haven&#8217;t shared it publicly with the congregation for the same reasons a professor would not want to. People growing from our ministries would be too freak out (as I would&#8217;ve been). Therefore, I practice it in private, and they receive the benefits.</p>
<p>I thank God that I speak in tongues.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.1ccc.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.1ccc.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill N.</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-53695</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill N.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-53695</guid>
		<description>Paul said he thanked God he spoke in tongues more than them all &quot;but in the church&quot;.  What if Paul is making an honest assessment of the fact that he speaks in foreign languages he did not learn more than they all do when he is out among the Gentiles establishing new churches?  He could validly say that if, when he returned and shared with the churches how God has used him, they would report that God is not at all pouring out that gift among them to the same degree.  It&#039;s simple math, no exaggeration.

Consider the opposite.  Given that Paul had to preach a lot in Greek, a widow spending her days in prayer from sun-up to sun-down could easily pray in an earthly language unknown to herself more than Paul.  Since Paul is not given to exaggeration he could be speaking as he does in Philippians.   In Philippians, he said that all those things he once thought so worthwhile (heritage, accomplishment) are now considered rubbish in order that he may know Christ.  Similarly, in 1 Corinthians, sandwiching the love chapter, he gives his testimony as a person many look up to, saying, &quot;Hey, you want to be like me because I speak in tongues.  Fine, then listen up:  I speak in tongues more than all, but I&#039;d rather speak 5 intelligible words in the church to lift people up rather than 1000 unintelligible ones  that don&#039;t, and you should also, okay? &quot;  Pretty powerful testimony and example.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul said he thanked God he spoke in tongues more than them all &#8220;but in the church&#8221;.  What if Paul is making an honest assessment of the fact that he speaks in foreign languages he did not learn more than they all do when he is out among the Gentiles establishing new churches?  He could validly say that if, when he returned and shared with the churches how God has used him, they would report that God is not at all pouring out that gift among them to the same degree.  It&#8217;s simple math, no exaggeration.</p>
<p>Consider the opposite.  Given that Paul had to preach a lot in Greek, a widow spending her days in prayer from sun-up to sun-down could easily pray in an earthly language unknown to herself more than Paul.  Since Paul is not given to exaggeration he could be speaking as he does in Philippians.   In Philippians, he said that all those things he once thought so worthwhile (heritage, accomplishment) are now considered rubbish in order that he may know Christ.  Similarly, in 1 Corinthians, sandwiching the love chapter, he gives his testimony as a person many look up to, saying, &#8220;Hey, you want to be like me because I speak in tongues.  Fine, then listen up:  I speak in tongues more than all, but I&#8217;d rather speak 5 intelligible words in the church to lift people up rather than 1000 unintelligible ones  that don&#8217;t, and you should also, okay? &#8221;  Pretty powerful testimony and example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-50638</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-50638</guid>
		<description>Oh, just another thought.. does the fact Jesus&#039; action of rebuking the waves change the middle voice of the word? (i.e. because middle voice can be active, passive or neither, does Jesus&#039; action affect the voice and make it become a passive verb, where as the corinthians one does not have an action upon the verb?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, just another thought.. does the fact Jesus&#8217; action of rebuking the waves change the middle voice of the word? (i.e. because middle voice can be active, passive or neither, does Jesus&#8217; action affect the voice and make it become a passive verb, where as the corinthians one does not have an action upon the verb?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-50637</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:47:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-50637</guid>
		<description>Yeah, that&#039;s probably a good point. Initially I thought I was on to something, however looking at it again, it really was going nowhere! 
I enjoy much of Carson&#039;s work, although I find some of it a little drawn out. E.g. Is leaving out tongues as being partial and also changing the word for cease for tongues only to change it back for knowledge stylistic variation? I&#039;m not too sure.
John Macarthur offers many sermons on this topic, and I would have to say I agree with him. However, his point of argument builds also on the idea of the purpose of tongues, as being a &#039;sign&#039; and how signs and wonders were required for legitimacy for the foundation of the early church.

Fascinating topic though, I appreciate all the dialogue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, that&#8217;s probably a good point. Initially I thought I was on to something, however looking at it again, it really was going nowhere!<br />
I enjoy much of Carson&#8217;s work, although I find some of it a little drawn out. E.g. Is leaving out tongues as being partial and also changing the word for cease for tongues only to change it back for knowledge stylistic variation? I&#8217;m not too sure.<br />
John Macarthur offers many sermons on this topic, and I would have to say I agree with him. However, his point of argument builds also on the idea of the purpose of tongues, as being a &#8216;sign&#8217; and how signs and wonders were required for legitimacy for the foundation of the early church.</p>
<p>Fascinating topic though, I appreciate all the dialogue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Cowan</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-50634</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Cowan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:17:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-50634</guid>
		<description>Ryan,

Consult Stanley Porter&#039;s work on verbal aspect.  Tense is probably not so neatly tied to time as most introductory grammars suggest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ryan,</p>
<p>Consult Stanley Porter&#8217;s work on verbal aspect.  Tense is probably not so neatly tied to time as most introductory grammars suggest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-50630</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-50630</guid>
		<description>Just a quick devil&#039;s advocate;
Luke 8:24 uses &quot;epausanto&quot; , whilst 1 Corinthians 13:8 uses &quot;pausontai&quot;. Although both from the same root verb, &quot;epausanto&quot; is AORIST aspect and indicative, indicating past event, whereas &quot;pausontai&quot; is FUTURE tense, indicating yet to come.

Any thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a quick devil&#8217;s advocate;<br />
Luke 8:24 uses &#8220;epausanto&#8221; , whilst 1 Corinthians 13:8 uses &#8220;pausontai&#8221;. Although both from the same root verb, &#8220;epausanto&#8221; is AORIST aspect and indicative, indicating past event, whereas &#8220;pausontai&#8221; is FUTURE tense, indicating yet to come.</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ali</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-32420</link>
		<dc:creator>Ali</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-32420</guid>
		<description>Benjamin, I&#039;m happy for you to take that view.  I am merely going by what D.A. Carson says, and I trust his years of study in the Greek language.  His understanding of the middle voice is that its use is wider than the use you limit it to.  He provided one example.  If you want to prove him wrong, you &lt;i&gt;could&lt;/i&gt; look up all the occurances in the NT (and Septuagint if you want to go that far) and show that, except for Luke 8:24, the middle voice means self-acting.  But even with one example, the door remains open that the same word in Luke 8:24 and 1 Cor 13 both do not take the meaning &quot;to cease of themselves&quot;.  Certainly, nothing in the context of 1 Cor 13 demands it reads that way.  I will agree, however, that if there are no other examples where the middle voice does not mean acting on oneself it would be unlikely.  Still, Greek grammars themselves don&#039;t always have all the information on particular grammatical points that is available.  

Please forgive me if I don&#039;t agree with your doctrine or arguments.  I didn&#039;t intend to respond to any more comments, but you seem so intent on getting your point across I thought it rude not.  I can&#039;t promise to do so from now on.  All the best with your study.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Benjamin, I&#8217;m happy for you to take that view.  I am merely going by what D.A. Carson says, and I trust his years of study in the Greek language.  His understanding of the middle voice is that its use is wider than the use you limit it to.  He provided one example.  If you want to prove him wrong, you <i>could</i> look up all the occurances in the NT (and Septuagint if you want to go that far) and show that, except for Luke 8:24, the middle voice means self-acting.  But even with one example, the door remains open that the same word in Luke 8:24 and 1 Cor 13 both do not take the meaning &#8220;to cease of themselves&#8221;.  Certainly, nothing in the context of 1 Cor 13 demands it reads that way.  I will agree, however, that if there are no other examples where the middle voice does not mean acting on oneself it would be unlikely.  Still, Greek grammars themselves don&#8217;t always have all the information on particular grammatical points that is available.  </p>
<p>Please forgive me if I don&#8217;t agree with your doctrine or arguments.  I didn&#8217;t intend to respond to any more comments, but you seem so intent on getting your point across I thought it rude not.  I can&#8217;t promise to do so from now on.  All the best with your study.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamin A</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-32324</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin A</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 14:06:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-32324</guid>
		<description>Ali,
You said-
â€œYou seem to be trying to read into Jesusâ€™ stopping the storm the same â€œstopping actionâ€ you read into â€œtongues will ceaseâ€ i.e. that the action of something being stopped by someone is the same as the action of something stopping by itself.â€
I was showing that in both occasions, Jesus stopping the storm and tongues ceasing, the one commonality between the two is that they ceased. And that I believe God was behind/in both.
Pauo  used in the MIDDLE VOICE  when used of inanimate objects indicates a reflexive, self-causing action. Meaning, the action comes from within; itâ€™s a built in action (i.e. it has a shelf life).
When pauo middle voice is used of persons, it describes intentional, voluntary action upon oneself. Causing oneself to come to a stop by oneâ€™s own act.
Are you saying thatâ€™s not the normal use and meaning of the middle voice?
Iâ€™m saying that is the normal use of the middle voice. With any verb. Not just pauo.
Simply finding one exception to the rule does not make a rule cease (pun intended). That seems to be your argument.  Itâ€™s like you are saying, since we have found one exception to the normal language rule, then every other use must follow the exception rather than following the rule.
Read any Greek grammar on the use of the middle voice. Whatever the action of the verb, the middle voice indicates that the action is self induced. It acts against itself.
And in 1 Corinthians 13:8 tongues is said to cease [pauo-middle voice]. To argue against the normal usage of the middle voice there is not warranted.  The only reason it is, is to make a certain theological system work.  Taking the plain, normal reading/usage of the middle voice there, in my opinion is the only honest approach to understanding that text.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ali,<br />
You said-<br />
â€œYou seem to be trying to read into Jesusâ€™ stopping the storm the same â€œstopping actionâ€ you read into â€œtongues will ceaseâ€ i.e. that the action of something being stopped by someone is the same as the action of something stopping by itself.â€<br />
I was showing that in both occasions, Jesus stopping the storm and tongues ceasing, the one commonality between the two is that they ceased. And that I believe God was behind/in both.<br />
Pauo  used in the MIDDLE VOICE  when used of inanimate objects indicates a reflexive, self-causing action. Meaning, the action comes from within; itâ€™s a built in action (i.e. it has a shelf life).<br />
When pauo middle voice is used of persons, it describes intentional, voluntary action upon oneself. Causing oneself to come to a stop by oneâ€™s own act.<br />
Are you saying thatâ€™s not the normal use and meaning of the middle voice?<br />
Iâ€™m saying that is the normal use of the middle voice. With any verb. Not just pauo.<br />
Simply finding one exception to the rule does not make a rule cease (pun intended). That seems to be your argument.  Itâ€™s like you are saying, since we have found one exception to the normal language rule, then every other use must follow the exception rather than following the rule.<br />
Read any Greek grammar on the use of the middle voice. Whatever the action of the verb, the middle voice indicates that the action is self induced. It acts against itself.<br />
And in 1 Corinthians 13:8 tongues is said to cease [pauo-middle voice]. To argue against the normal usage of the middle voice there is not warranted.  The only reason it is, is to make a certain theological system work.  Taking the plain, normal reading/usage of the middle voice there, in my opinion is the only honest approach to understanding that text.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ali</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-32279</link>
		<dc:creator>Ali</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:53:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-32279</guid>
		<description>G&#039;day Benjamin,

Yeah, it is a little difficult to see the flow between the two quotes because I left out some connecting sentences.

Basically, the first quote is addressing the argument that the word &lt;i&gt;pausontai&lt;/i&gt; alone indicates that tongues stops on its own.  The second quote is addressing a similar argument that broadens out to include sentence structure and use (or not) of &lt;i&gt;prophecy&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;knowledge&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;tongues&lt;/i&gt; in Corinthians 13.  Both these arguments have been presented in the comments above.

Do I agree with Carson?  Yes, I think so.  I think you need to do more than try to read your preferred meaning of &lt;i&gt;pausontai&lt;/i&gt; into Luke 8:24.  You seem to be trying to read into Jesus&#039; stopping the storm the same &quot;stopping action&quot; you read into &quot;tongues will cease&quot; i.e. that the action of something &lt;i&gt;being stopped by someone&lt;/i&gt; is the same as the action of something &lt;i&gt;stopping by itself&lt;/i&gt;.

What you seem to have done to get to that conclusion is conflate the sovereign acts of God behind the scenes with a specified act &quot;in front of the scenes&quot;.  It&#039;s like saying that a car that &quot;ceases&quot; to move because Jesus held up his hand to stop it is the same as a car that &quot;ceases&quot; to move because of a mechanical failure.  Sure, Jesus sovereignly caused both to happen, but acted directly on the car to cause the first, and not the second.

I&#039;m sorry, I&#039;m not convinced.

As for the second quote, Carson&#039;s main point is that people read things into differences of word order and choice that can just as easily (more easily according to Carson) be explained stylistically.

I get the impression you are quite attached to your argument, Benjamin, so I&#039;m not going to try and convince you to let it go.  There are millions of Christians who have survived and thrived without ever speaking in tongues, and I trust you&#039;ll be one of them, despite the fact that you and Carson and I disagree.

God bless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>G&#8217;day Benjamin,</p>
<p>Yeah, it is a little difficult to see the flow between the two quotes because I left out some connecting sentences.</p>
<p>Basically, the first quote is addressing the argument that the word <i>pausontai</i> alone indicates that tongues stops on its own.  The second quote is addressing a similar argument that broadens out to include sentence structure and use (or not) of <i>prophecy</i>, <i>knowledge</i> and <i>tongues</i> in Corinthians 13.  Both these arguments have been presented in the comments above.</p>
<p>Do I agree with Carson?  Yes, I think so.  I think you need to do more than try to read your preferred meaning of <i>pausontai</i> into Luke 8:24.  You seem to be trying to read into Jesus&#8217; stopping the storm the same &#8220;stopping action&#8221; you read into &#8220;tongues will cease&#8221; i.e. that the action of something <i>being stopped by someone</i> is the same as the action of something <i>stopping by itself</i>.</p>
<p>What you seem to have done to get to that conclusion is conflate the sovereign acts of God behind the scenes with a specified act &#8220;in front of the scenes&#8221;.  It&#8217;s like saying that a car that &#8220;ceases&#8221; to move because Jesus held up his hand to stop it is the same as a car that &#8220;ceases&#8221; to move because of a mechanical failure.  Sure, Jesus sovereignly caused both to happen, but acted directly on the car to cause the first, and not the second.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry, I&#8217;m not convinced.</p>
<p>As for the second quote, Carson&#8217;s main point is that people read things into differences of word order and choice that can just as easily (more easily according to Carson) be explained stylistically.</p>
<p>I get the impression you are quite attached to your argument, Benjamin, so I&#8217;m not going to try and convince you to let it go.  There are millions of Christians who have survived and thrived without ever speaking in tongues, and I trust you&#8217;ll be one of them, despite the fact that you and Carson and I disagree.</p>
<p>God bless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamin A</title>
		<link>http://www.dennyburk.com/d-a-carson-on-private-prayer-language/#comment-32239</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin A</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1410#comment-32239</guid>
		<description>Ali,

Do you even agree with your post #54? Or are you simply using it as an alternative view? 
From my read of that quote, and re-read, it is of no consequence. It adds nothing seriously for consideration.
It simply seems like an attempt to blur the plain reading of the text.
Just my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ali,</p>
<p>Do you even agree with your post #54? Or are you simply using it as an alternative view?<br />
From my read of that quote, and re-read, it is of no consequence. It adds nothing seriously for consideration.<br />
It simply seems like an attempt to blur the plain reading of the text.<br />
Just my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

