Christian only : Modern tongues movement

[David1967]

As a man raised in a church that does not practice speaking in tongues, that is married to a woman who is very much Pentacostal, I am interested in your thoughts concerning the modern tongues movement. Its origins as well as its pactice.

 

[Glaurung]

As a man raised in a church that does not practice speaking in tongues, that is married to a woman who is very much Pentacostal, I am interested in your thoughts concerning the modern tongues movement. Its origins as well as its pactice.

I have always understood speaking in tongues to mean that one is understood (despite speaking one language) in the native language of all hearers. So if I were to peach to you in French, you'd hear my words as if they were in English. A passing-by German would hear me as if I were speaking German. And so on.

The "speaking in tongues" as practised by pentecostal types, is in my honest opinion, ridiculous, self-deluding nonsense at its best; potentially demonic at its worst.

 

[David1967]

I have always understood speaking in tongues to mean that one is understood (despite speaking one language) in the native language of all hearers. So if I were to peach to you in French, you'd hear my words as if they were in English. A passing-by German would hear me as if I were speaking German. And so on.

The "speaking in tongues" as practised by pentecostal types, is in my honest opinion, ridiculous, self-deluding nonsense at its best; potentially demonic at its worst.

With the first part of your reply, I agree 100%. On the day of Pentacost the people heard their language from the Apostles whatever their language was. To the second part I agree partially. (to agree 100% would get me in so much trouble with my Pentacostal wife .) I have looked into the speaking in tongues phenomenon culturally and it is nothing new. I seen a Tibetan Shaman speak in tongues. A voodoo priestess speak in tongues and a Spiritist channeling a spirit speak in tongues....and truthfully it didn't sound much different than what I have observed in Charismatic Pentacostal churches. I guess my question to the Pentacostals would be how they know the differences.

 

[Spiritual Ascendancy]

As a man raised in a church that does not practice speaking in tongues, that is married to a woman who is very much Pentacostal, I am interested in your thoughts concerning the modern tongues movement. Its origins as well as its pactice.

This belongs in the Christianity DIR. If you place this in the general debate DIR anyone can say anything on it.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

when the apostles spoke in tongues, other people understood what they were saying. most of the modern speaking in tongues is just gibberish which no one understands. it serves no purpose

 

[Renji]

The way I understand it, there are "tongues"
that can be a 'language' foreign to us. Example, you are someone from America and upon receiving this gift you are able to speak in Greek even if unknown to you. There are some instances of this that have occurred and have been documented (though I am not sure of the reliability of the sources), the book 'God's Generals' (I am currently reading the EBook) recalled an instance wherein there are people somewhere in Whales if I am not mistaken who are able to speak in French during praise and worship time even if the language is completely unknown to them previously. There are professional language interpreters present at the time it happened (according to that book) to verify it. There are also tongues that is a mystery or heavenly language spoken by you unto God and cannot be understood by anyone, unless someone with the gift of interpretation (or it is something that should be interpreted) of tongues is present. I do believe those gifts are still active right now (based in the bible and the beliefs of many christians; note however that I am no longer a christian but if I base
it on scriptures, books and on the things I used to believe in, I'd say the gift is still there). Then again, what's the use of such Gifts if it is not motivated by love or that the focus of the recepient of such gift are the gifts itself instead of the Giver of gifts? Judas Iscariot himself have gift of healing (according to scholars), but it did not help him be Christ centered. Intact he betrayed Jesus. It is still by our faith and the fruits of it that really matters (should matter) to a chtistian I think.

 

[David1967]

The way I understand it, there are "tongues"
that can be a 'language' foreign to us. Example, you are someone from America and upon receiving this gift you are able to speak in Greek even if unknown to you. There are some instances if this that have occurred and have been documented (though I am not sure if the reliability of the sources), the book 'God's Generals' (I am currently reading the EBook) recalled an instance wherein there are people somewhere in Whales if I am not mistaken who are able to speak in French during praise and worship time even if the language is completely unknown to them previously. There are language interpreters present at the time it happened (according to that book) to verify it. There are also tongues that is a mystery or heavenly language spoken by you unto God and cannot be understood by anyone, unless someone with the way gift of interpretation (or it is something that should be interpreted) of tongues is present. I do believe those gifts are still active right now (based in the bible and the beliefs of many christians, no longer a christian but if I base
it there and on the things I used to believe in, I'd say the gift is still there). Then again, what's the use of such Gifts if it is not motivated by love or that the focus already are the gifts instead of the Giver of gifts? Judas Iscariot himself have gift of healing (according to scholars), but it did not help him be Christ centered. Intact he betrayed Jesus. It is still by our faith and the fruits of it that really matters (should matter) to a chtistian I think.

Thanks for that. you really did do some study. It shows

 

[David1967]

when the apostles spoke in tongues, other people understood what they were saying. most of the modern speaking in tongues is just gibberish which no one understands. it serves no purpose

I think the word you used "purpose" says it all. For what purpose today?

 

[Nietzsche]

With the first part of your reply, I agree 100%. On the day of Pentacost the people heard their language from the Apostles whatever their language was. To the second part I agree partially. (to agree 100% would get me in so much trouble with my Pentacostal wife .) I have looked into the speaking in tongues phenomenon culturally and it is nothing new. I seen a Tibetan Shaman speak in tongues. A voodoo priestess speak in tongues and a Spiritist channeling a spirit speak in tongues....and truthfully it didn't sound much different than what I have observed in Charismatic Pentacostal churches. I guess my question to the Pentacostals would be how they know the differences.

I'm posting from a linguistic point of view only, not a religious one;

There isn't a difference. There is no commonality between any "tongues" speech you find. A language is coherent and follows an internal logic, no matter how strange it may be, and things with similar properties can be used as a language(such as why Math is always brought up when we talk about contact with aliens, numerical values are constant and can be arranged through trial & error to form a primitive form of communication or at least recognition). "Tongues" speech however, has none of those. You would expect there to be some kind of thread connecting it, even if we had no way to translate it, the sounds would follow a pattern, because there are only so many sounds a human mouth can make, and with the sheer volume of "samples" you would expect a large range of over-lap due simply because of how few words are really used in a conversation.

For instance, take my response up there. That short little thing is only 152 words long. But "of" is used 6 times, "there" "and" & "be" are each used 4 times..

I think you can see where I'm going here.

 

[Renji]

Thanks for that. you really did do some study. It shows

Sorry for some grammar errors though. I am already sleepy when I posted that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The "speaking in tongues" as practised by pentecostal types, is in my honest opinion, ridiculous, self-deluding nonsense at its best; potentially demonic at its worst.

^This. I never had a good feeling about it and it never made much sense to me.

To be honest, it has much in common with Voodoo, when they are possessed by the Lwa. It actually might have stemmed from it by way of African-American influence.

 

[David1967]

I'm posting from a linguistic point of view only, not a religious one;

There isn't a difference. There is no commonality between any "tongues" speech you find. A language is coherent and follows an internal logic, no matter how strange it may be, and things with similar properties can be used as a language(such as why Math is always brought up when we talk about contact with aliens, numerical values are constant and can be arranged through trial & error to form a primitive form of communication or at least recognition). "Tongues" speech however, has none of those. You would expect there to be some kind of thread connecting it, even if we had no way to translate it, the sounds would follow a pattern, because there are only so many sounds a human mouth can make, and with the sheer volume of "samples" you would expect a large range of over-lap due simply because of how few words are really used in a conversation.

For instance, take my response up there. That short little thing is only 152 words long. But "of" is used 6 times, "there" "and" & "be" are each used 4 times..

I think you can see where I'm going here.

Wow....Outstanding post. What you say makes perfect sense.

 

[David1967]

^This. I never had a good feeling about it and it never made much sense to me.

To be honest, it has much in common with Voodoo, when they are possessed by the Lwa. It actually might have stemmed from it by way of African-American influence.

You may well be correct, as what I saw the voodoo practitioner in Haiti doing sounded no different than modern Charismatics. Even to the point where they fell on the ground/floor eyes rolled back in their head having some sort of what appeared to be seizure. We should be careful what we blame on the Holy Spirit.

 

[Nietzsche]

Wow....Outstanding post. What you say makes perfect sense.

Thank you. I do my best.

You may well be correct, as what I saw the voodoo practitioner in Haiti doing sounded no different than modern Charismatics. Even to the point where they fell on the ground/floor eyes rolled back in their head having some sort of what appeared to be seizure. We should be careful what we blame on the Holy Spirit.

I would go further and say that the absolute last thing that should be done is to label anything as supernatural/divine/demonic/things in that vein. That's not to say to never do so, but it should only be done when every single other possible material explanation has been thoroughly and utterly ruled out, much like how the RCC deals with miracles, possession and other such things.

 

[rusra02]

As a man raised in a church that does not practice speaking in tongues, that is married to a woman who is very much Pentacostal, I am interested in your thoughts concerning the modern tongues movement. Its origins as well as its pactice.

Some, not all, early Christians spoke in tongues as a sign of God's choosing the newly established Christian congregation as his servants. (1 Corinthians 12:30) However, the Scriptures indicate that, in time, such speaking in tongues would stop. (1 Cirinthians 13:8) Today, speaking in tongues is not proof of being a true Christian. The identifying mark of true Christians is the love they have among themselves, not speaking in unknown tongues, IMO. (John 13:34,35 and 1 Corinthians 14:19)

 

[David1967]

Thank you. I do my best.

I would go further and say that the absolute last thing that should be done is to label anything as supernatural/divine/demonic/things in that vein. That's not to say to never do so, but it should only be done when every single other possible material explanation has been thoroughly and utterly ruled out, much like how the RCC deals with miracles, possession and other such things.

You are absolutely right, especially when the Televangelist nutcases are selling their so called miracles to the gullible. Anytime profit is introduced into a religion shameful things follow. I believe in God and His ability to do miraculous things,, but I think it is a rare thing when He actually does intervene.

 

[paarsurrey]

I have always understood speaking in tongues to mean that one is understood (despite speaking one language) in the native language of all hearers. So if I were to peach to you in French, you'd hear my words as if they were in English. A passing-by German would hear me as if I were speaking German. And so on.
The "speaking in tongues" as practised by pentecostal types, is in my honest opinion, ridiculous, self-deluding nonsense at its best; potentially demonic at its worst.

Mirza Masroor Ahmad-the Fifth Caliph of the Promised Messiah when he delivers a Friday Sermon, it is simultaneously translated and heard in many languages:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi_webp/nK3uDLRnt30/mqdefault.webp
<iframe width="480" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/x7KhRjJ6fMk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Title:Khalifatul Masih II: Pearls of Wisdom
Delivered by: Delivered byHazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmadat
Summary:English|Tamil|Malayalam|Kannada
Summary by Wakil Ala:English
Slide Deck:Powerpoint|PDFPowerpoint|
Other Languages:Arabic|Bosnian|French
Urdu(mp3)Albanian(mp3)Bengali(mp3)Bosnian(mp3)Bulgarian(mp3)French(mp3)German(mp3)Indonesian(mp3)Malayalam(mp3)Russian(mp3)Sindhi(mp3)Spanish(mp3)Swahili(mp3)Tamil(mp3)Turkish(mp3)
And it is listened the world over on MTA TV Channels.
Regards

 

[roger1440]

As a man raised in a church that does not practice speaking in tongues, that is married to a woman who is very much Pentacostal, I am interested in your thoughts concerning the modern tongues movement. Its origins as well as its pactice.

The origins of the Church is an extreme perversion of the message of in the books they hold as holy

 

[David1967]

The origins of the Church is an extreme perversion of the message of in the books they hold as holy

Please ,go on.

 

[David1967]

Please ,go on.

I mean ,explain further.