Glossolalia and its interpretation show there is absolutely no meaning in the words at all. Why not just give them the telepathic interpretation and skip the meaningless and confusing middle step? What is the point of God randomly giving multiple contradictory interpretations for the same exact phrase, would this not only serve to confuse genuine seekers? If the interpretation is a spiritual thing, that is in no way based on the actual sounds of glossolalia, what is the purpose of the sounds at all?
The speaking in tongues question - Society of Saints
Numerous studies and publications have shown that glossolalia is a learned human behavior that can be fully taught to others without supernatural intervention 24, 25, 26, 27 Take the following study, for example:. If glossolalia is a supernatural gift why can it be perfectly recreated by careful non-believing observers? While it is perhaps be possible that a few individuals throughout history did indeed believe that they had lost this gift of tongues probably because they were told they could lost it , the data does not fit with such a view.
- Speaking in Tongues - The real story • Skeptical Science.
- Aforismi, novelle e profezie di Leonardo da Vinci (Italian Edition);
- Superlópez. ¡Todos contra uno, uno contra todos! (Spanish Edition).
- Know Your Tongue - Know Your Health.
- 5 Ways to Tame your Tongue.
How can people gain or lose tongues only by a supernatural intervention if nonbelievers, or those of other religions, can be easily taught to speak in tongues? In fact, some prominent atheists can still produce the full range of the glossolalic experience, see for example Dan Barkers anti testimony, in which he states that as a Pentecostal pastor he frequently spoke in tongues, and now as an atheist, still does it from time to time 28 Also see the testimony Marjoe Goertner, a famous charismatic healing evangelist, who later revealed that he was an atheist, even during his later healing crusades.
Why is speaking in tongues, the evidence for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, when it can clearly be learned and manifested by most people who attempt it? Why can an angelic supernatural language be copied and imitated by undergraduate students who have a few training sessions? Why do prominent Charismatics or Pentecostals who leave the faith retain the ability to speak in tongues, should they not lose their gift?
Yet, when it comes to the speaking of glossolalia, Jesus is absolutely and completely silent. He does not, even on one occasion mention speaking in unknown tongues glossolalia. Even as Jesus devotes time to clear teachings about prayer Mat 6: And not only silent, but as we have mentioned, the teachings of Jesus on prayer, completely contradict the manifestations of glossolalia Mat 6: There is indeed one place where, reportedly, Jesus speaks of glossolalia, and that would be Mark A cursory look at any contemporary Bible translation will find the whole section of Mark Textual criticism and historic research has shown that this part of Mark is almost certainly an addition by scribes who copied the Bible, and it was not in the original text of Mark.
In essence all prominent biblical scholars and textual critics agree, the long ending of Mark we are familiar with, which is one of four endings found in numerous ancient fragments of Mark, was not in the original. Yet, even if they were, a cursory glance at the context shows that these signs Jesus talks of new tongues, drink poison, handle snakes refer to events that are not normative. Paul was bitten by one snake on one occasion, surely this passage does not mean we must seek out snakes to handle? I concede that the snake handling churches in the Appalachian mountains might disagree with my rhetoric.
This brings us back to the original question, why was Jesus silent on glossolalia if it is one of the most important functions and indeed evidence of the Holy Spirit? Why did Jesus command a specific type of prayer, if he was planning to replace it with a glossolalia, a radical departure of his command, in two years? Why would he keep this all secret? Surely these are vital questions? If Jesus is our primary teacher, and Christianity is all about Jesus, why is Jesus completely silent on the issue Pentecostals place at the core of the Christian experience?
If you simply wanted to obey the words of Jesus, you could become a Christian, but could you ever become a glossolalist? If a few chapters from 1st Corinthians were lost, you could still be a Christian but could you be a glossolalist? Why is this the case, if glossolalia is such a core doctrine of the Bible? The historical case of glossolalia within the Christian world is one of the most intriguing ideas to tantalize the ears of man. There was, however, a ecstatic cult led by Montanus who engaged in glossolalia it should be noted that Tertullian, mentioned previously, was at one point a follower of Montanus.
The early church historian Eusebius, writing probably around CE, states the following about Montanus:. However, other historians, evaluating these claims have noted that:. As well as obvious glossolalia in the Mormon church, and the Quaker movement. Case in point, not even one of the historic Christian leaders or movements that we are familiar with spoke in tongues. As far as more recent history, we can readily ascertain which historic Christian leaders spoke in tongues.
The answer is close to none. So where do we see the advent of glossolalia? And this is not a historic argument that Pentecostal historians disagree with, in fact, its one they cherish, below are two official Pentecostal sources:. The early history of Pentecostalism was plagued by controversy, as many new movements are.
Part of the reason was the radical departure from religion known as Christianity at the time. Another famous Holiness movement leader, A. Perhaps some of this is a form of biased over-reporting by the Holiness movement from which early Pentecostalism broke away, though this is attested in Pentecostal sources. Yet, the main fact agreed upon by all sides of this story is that glossolalia was not a normative Christian experience, and was literally unheard by almost all Christians before the birth of Pentecostalism.
This presents further cause for serious skepticism towards glossolalia. Theologically, are we really to believe that virtually all Christians before the origin of Pentecostalism did not have the Holy Spirit? The great leaders of the reformation and three hundred years after were all without the Holy Spirit as well? In fact, why does the first real case of glossolalia appear after a group of students were first convinced of its existence and set out to prove it right? Why does modern history show the exact opposite? In general, why would God hide this gift for more almost two thousand years and then reveal through students who later admitted they were partly wrong?
Why is glossolalia missing from the normative practice of historic Christianity? There are a great many whys, but few compelling answers. Maybe glossolalia is a real spiritual language given by God, yet the evidence from Scripture, history, science, logic, and reason is hardly in favor of this conclusion. Is , your Spirit speaking. Now , you can doctrinize this if you wish? God was in you prior to the revelation. No body saves you , but God.
I was Water Baptized 20 years ago. I asked the spirit whether I had the Holy Spirit before my confession of faith? And it is not a prerequisite for you to be a Christian to have it. I was excommunicated 10 years ago for divorcing a Jezebel. Its not associated with God in any form of spiritual manner and holds no power or authority. Its purpose was to show the hard headed jewish people the spirit has come through the messiah and the laws cant help them anymore with sins.
Anything outside of that is witchcraft. Thus, this produces more questions. His questions I would suggest are more rhetorical. They merely set the stage for further inquiry. Religous estacy is real. People take very sorry paths in there lives trusting emotions vs there God Given Gut instinct.
Unless you study other religions and understand all Religions have the ability to tap into a divine energy. God loves his people.
I myself a Christian born and raised 24 years old. Recently found out family members spoke in tounges, prophecy, and Slain in the Spirit. Truth is the Christian Religion has adopted a lot of occult practices in the last 50 years. Not trying to make anyone mad just speaking the truth that people need to hear. Another point all of the major Religions believe they have a holy Spirit. Moral of the Story on Speaking in Tongues to current Christians that do it. It most definitely is real. If you are a firm believer and feel that your emotions are the only reason you believe I suggest having blind faith or Looking at other religions.
They all promote wisdom peace and love. After all the whole speaking in tongues goes all the way back bc worshipping a pagan God. The people practiced it for healing and emotion. Unless your speaking a fluent foreign language your not speaking in tongues from the Holy Spirit. I would know because I have experienced the warm feelings coming over me. Speaking in Tongues is Contagious. Your mind has the ability to manifest anything. A languist went out and study a pagan cult group speaking in tongues and before he knew it a feeling came over him and he was speaking in tongues with them.
Religous estacy is a very serious thing. With the internet research critically think about your questions and the Answers are in plain sight. There can be valid answers that reasonable, educated people would find satisfactory, while still allowing room for honest disagreement about which side has the stronger point. It appears that we disagree about the nature of the Bible, its divine origin, and its trustworthiness, so that might be the real source of our disagreement about the validity of tongues.
You have posts on your blog rejecting any meaningful doctrine of inerrancy, and I find your points unconvincing, and continue to believe in inerrancy. If you do not believe in the Bible, then of course you can dismiss passages that contradict your personal opinions, and most people who doubt the Bible use the passages that contradict their personal opinions as further argument for not believing in the Bible.
Why do different charismatic groups have different vowels and accents of glossolalia? First, most charismatic and Pentecostal groups would not automatically accept the genuineness of all other groups that claim to speak in tongues. And vice-versa — I do not believe that anti-Trinitarians are fellow believers or have salvation, so I would expect their tongues to be phony, either manufactured humanly or a demonic counterfeit. I recognize that in your later question about non-Christians speaking in tongues, you take issue with the easy dismissal of these things as counterfeits, but the very same argumentation you use is used by atheists in response to the Christian dismissal of non-Christian religions as counterfeits.
More on this below. The point here is that your ten points overall lead to the conclusion that ALL tongues are counterfeits, so it is illogical to then reject the possibility that SOME or even most could be counterfeits, and some real. Second, even if tongues were a valid manifestation of the Holy Spirit today, that does not necessarily mean that most people in Pentecostal churches are really doing it as opposed to mimicking it , or even that most Pentecostals are believers or are saved.
Like most evangelical churches many Pentecostal churches are full of people who live in flagrant sin, who are materialistic and superficial, and who are merely religious and have never surrendered their lives to Christ. Even if tongues were real today, it would be entirely possible that most people claiming to speak in tongues are not actually doing so. But this is true for every aspect of Christianity. Most evangelicals claim to base ALL their religious beliefs on the Bible, but very few of them have ever read the whole Bible, and most of them have an extrabiblical holiday Christmas as a major part of their annual religious observance.
Genuine miraculous healings occur today, but there are many faked healings and exaggerated reports of healings. Genuine answers to prayer occur, but lots of religious people attribute events to their own prayers that would have occurred regardless of their prayers. Evangelicals claim that their churches are bastions of family values, yet the incidence of divorce and remarriage in their churches is similar to that in the general culture.
If both of those answers seem to easy, here is a third: I reject this assumption. None of the biblical passages about glossolalia seems to indicate that it always sounded the same in the New Testament era. Some Pentecostals believe that glossolalia is really xenoglossy. There are approximately 8, spoken languages in the world right now, and presumably several thousand that have gone extinct over the centuries. It is possible, therefore that different believers or even groups of believers are speaking different languages unknown to them.
More likely, I believe, is the possibility that genuine tongues is not a pre-established language of communication whether earthly or heavenly but could be a spontaneously-created new language. The biblical passages about glossolalia would even allow for the possibility that each occurrence of tongues is a new language spontaneously generated by the Holy Spirit.
In addition, speakers of various languages have a very difficult time making certain sounds that are not part of their language. I grew up in the United States, and I struggled with gutturals and pharyngeal letters when I studied Arabic. Similarly, I do not expect Americans to memorize as much of the Bible as believers in non-literate societies would do, and I do not expect believers in societies with no written language to read and think about the Scriptures in the same way that Americans can and do.
One could more easily ask why death-and-resurrection stories exist in paganism Mithras and Baal before Christianity, or the concept of having Sacred Scriptures, or healing, or baptism. Is there any aspect of Christianity that did not exist before the birth of Christianity? Every type of miracle recorded in the New Testament is also present in pre-Christian Judaism or pagan religions. I would expect that to be the case whether Christianity were true or false.
Ideals of brotherly love, self-sacrifice, grace, forgiveness, and other favorite doctrines of self-congratulatory modernist Christians are all visible in various pre-Christian religious sources, albeit not all put together in the same overall package as Christianity. If Christianity is true and tongues is valid, then it is unsurprising to find both counterfeits and genuine divine manifestations of the gift before the manifestation in the early church.
Again, this seems to be an argument for rejecting parts of Acts and 1 Corinthians rather than modern phenomenon that claim to be biblical glossolalia. This is hardly the only instance in which two superficially contradictory passage of Scripture need to be reconciled by believers today. The real contradiction seems to be between what Jesus says here and the traditions that have developed in some Pentecostal denominations for speaking in tongues at length.
In the context, though, Jesus is actually focused not merely on the repetitiousness of the prayer or the babbling aspect, but on the fact that the pagans believe that repetition makes divine response more likely. Perhaps some misguided Pentecostals think that praying in tongues for an hour makes some desired more likely to happen than if they had prayed only thirty minutes, but that would seem to be the type of foolishness Jesus is attacking here.
Very few non-Christian religions include glossolalia — the examples you give are rather obscure, and are just as much hearsay as the examples of xenoglossy that you so quickly dismiss later. Why not ask the same question about the Bible? Every major non-Christian religion has a Holy Book or Scriptures — does that discredit the Christian claims about the validity of the Bible?
Most non-Christian religions believer in miraculous answers to prayer — again, does that mean Christians should stop praying for things? Most non-Christians religions include fasting as part of their religious observance for the devout. Most encourage some type of monogamous sexual morality. Why is glossolalia any different in this regard? You must have been in the wrong churches.
The Assemblies and some other large Pentecostal denominations simply developed a tradition in this regard that contradicts the injunctions in 1 Corinthians. Yet that raises the main answer to your question. Your argument against modern tongues is equally an argument against the New Testament incidents of tongues. If interpretation was the main purpose, why were so many people in Corinth using glossolalia without an accompanying interpretation? It is not clear what occurred in Acts 2, except that it is obviously not the same thing that happened in Corinth and Ephesus.
Acts 2 is not necessarily xenoglossy — the audience mentions that at least 15 language groups were able to hear the preaching in their own tongues. Those who believe that xenoglossy occurred here must believe that each apostle was speaking a different language one of those mentioned , at the same time to the same crowd, which I think would have been impossible to understand.
An easier interpretation of Acts 2 is that the apostles all spoke in various glossolalia, and everyone heard all of them in his own language that is, a miracle of interpretation occurred at the same time for each person. Acts 2 was a special event that laid the groundwork for the spread of the early church across the civilized world within a generation — pilgrims who had visited Jerusalem for the feast days that year would all return to their own lands and cities having heard the gospel — they would either start small groups of nascent churches, or would be predisposed to embrace the gospel when apostles and evangelists eventually reached them on missionary trips.
The phenomenon described in 1 Corinthians seems to be merely a small part of a regular worship service — a very different event. If glossolalia is a real language, why are different interpretations given for the same phrase? You cite but one study where someone found various people who claimed to be able to interpret tongues. I have no reason for believing ANY of these people are genuine. I believe there would be just one interpretation for a given message in tongues.
It is his sovereign choice. This is completely bogus. People claiming to be trained in tongues are not experiencing biblical glossolalia, any more than Catholics who pray to relics for healing are experiencing biblical healing. Medieval monks claimed to be trained in holiness, but were merely trained in solitude and a monastic lifestyle, not a Spirit-transformed character. Finding extreme abuses by someone somewhere is an easy task regarding ANY component of Christianity. Again, we could ask this very same rhetorical question about a long list of things that the Epistles emphasize but that the Gospels never mention.
A more troubling question, for example, is why Jesus talks so little about the idea of substitutionary atonement or propitiation if it is the core of the gospel, why he never explains church government or the function of elders and deacons or their ordination , and why he never discusses Christian marriage and childrearing, except to condemn divorce and remarriage. Jesus never mentions the importance of Christians reading the Bible, either. I have trouble finding any passages in the Gospels that spell out concepts like Total Depravity apart from general references to people being sinful , Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, or Perseverance of the saints.
I would have expected Jesus to address these points more, especially given how central they have become to modern evangelicalism. Tongues is one I would not have expected Jesus to cover much at all, because it had so little relevance to the immediate Jewish context — it would only become relevant in the churches. In any case, tongues is far down the list of topics that we wish Jesus discussed. One could ask the same question about the great doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Salvation by Faith being absent from Christian theology for years before the Reformers.
Why are missionaries almost unheard of for the years before the Moravians? It was nearly years after the Protestant Reformation before Protestants realized their duty to evangelized unreached peoples. Altar calls and their equivalent were unheard of before the s — should we forbid these as well? Congregational singing of hymns is also a fairly recent development in church history.
For how many centuries was it unheard of for individual Christians to have a copy of the Bible or to read it? For the middle half of church history — years — most so-called Christians did not read the Bible, did not understand biblical salvation, worshiped and prayed to Mary, and attended churches led by a corrupt, immoral hierarchy. It is not at all surprising that New Testament spiritual gifts faded as the churches filled with baptized pagans — nominal Christians — after the time of Constantine.
After the Reformation, each generation went deeper in rediscovering biblical doctrines and practices.
As I said, it took centuries before Christians rediscovered concepts like personal relationship with Christ, missions, evangelism, regular devotional reading of Scripture by individuals, and so on. It is not that surprising that eventually, someone would fixate on the passages about tongues and prophecy in the New Testament and start praying for God to restore these experiences to the church. Sadly, most cultural Christians in every age are complacent with whatever form of Christianity surrounds them. They not only fail to look in the Bible to see if there might be more, but even get defensive and reactionary when someone claims to have something more or different or more biblical than what everybody else is doing.
If tongues occurred at any time in the years of church history before , it would have been stomped out quickly and forgotten, just as many of features of modern Christianity were. Before I offer very brief responses by point, you make an a priori assumption that there is glossolalia in Acts 19 and Corinthians. Then you argue out of this presupposition.
However, there is no evidence of this whatsoever. I have written a long hermeneutical piece discussing what the Scripture says about glossolalia, and one thing is very clear, the book of Acts undeniably records xenoglossy, not glossolalia. The Corinthians references are completely ambiguous and disputed by scholars, Pentecostals obviously claim these as glossolalia, non-charismatics claim otherwise, the does not at all say.
If we follow the precedent of Acts all the tongues are known languages it becomes harder to introduce this new concept of glossolalia into Corinithians. In any case, simply put, there is not even one case of modern glossolalia in the Bible. A successful prediction is most often better than multiple post hoc rationalizations after a failed prediction. By distracting from the point, you are not answering the question.
Furthermore, most apologists argue that many of these precursors to Christianity were very different in their mythology, while glossolalia as a phenomenon is very similar.
Ten questions with Tinashe
In any case we are comparing the development of mythological and theological ideas with an ecstatic behavior, this is not an apples to apples comparison. And finally, this still does not explain how one can make a counterfeit of something that does not exist. One could not counterfeit the US dollar in , because it did not yet exists. Yet, since there are so many counterfeits, and two post hoc rationalizations you provided essentially stated that its possible that most cases of glossolalia are counterfeit, this presents real difficulty.
How can the sign of being filled with the spirit be so easy to duplicate that many or most are counterfeit? Again you presuppose that Corinthians certainly is glossolalia, but there is a rigorous debate about this. Many argue that it was xenoglossy, and this needs to be interpreted when in a church. Since this is a highly contested idea, you cannot use it as a starting presupposition, but would have prove it first, which is nearly impossible given the many academic texts already published that do come to a consensus.
Since we cannot say the Corinthians tongues were glossolalia, and your whole arguments is built on this one premise, it fails. To introduce a tertiary, but completely absent, miracle of healing is to impose modern day Pentecostal doctrine into the Biblical text. This would be a very sloppy eisegesis, the exact opposite of what a proper exegesis and hermeneutic should look like. Samarin who wrote Tongues of Men and Angels conducted numerous surveys and studies, as have others a few whom are referenced.
Do a study where ten genuine interpreters hear one person praying in tongues, and independently come up with the same interpretation. Simply saying something is not true, does not make it untrue. There was a study where people did learn glossolalia. In addition I have taught people glossolalia and it has worked.
The point is, if my hypothesis is that tongues is a learned phenomenon, I predict it would be possible to teach it. If your hypothesis is that tongues is a supernatural phenomenon, you ought to predict the opposite. This is another case where my answer has predictive power, and you rely on post hoc rationalization or complete denial of the data.
Perhaps some of those other doctrines are not as essential as we think? My prediction is that whatever is truly important, Jesus and the Biblical authors would have made really clear. However, tongues is not one of these things, it is completely skipped by Jesus, and the few references by Paul are so ambiguous that there are tens of denominations still unable to come to an agreement on this issue. Again, by presenting another problem, you are not answering the first one. You are merely muddling the waters even more.
However, for the Spirit to have been absent for that whole time makes it impossible for people to be saved. You compare advanced theological ideas, to experiential indwelling of the Spirit, this is a poor comparison. He cannot be lost or forgotten, and he certainly does not need the proper doctrine to be present in Acts these people have no doctrine at all!
The point is, your argument is another post hoc rationalization, one that attempts to explain why your doctrinal predictions fail to account for the real world. Conclusion First, thank you for writing out answers, but I would argue that they fail to adequately answer the questions posed. When conducting scientific inquiry we make a hypothesis a statement or prediction , and then test this to see if it has predictive power.
If it does, we continue testing to fine tune our prediction. However, if a real world test does not match our statement, we assent that it was a flawed hypothesis and rethink it, we do not make post hoc rationalizations. I can continue to make almost unlimited post hoc rationalizations, or I can agree that my hypothesis lacks predictive power. These are all post hoc rationalizations, but the lack predictive power. Your responses were all post hoc rationalizations that attempted to explain why these predictions failed.
They could all be true, but its far far more likely that they are not. I greatly comment both D. Stevenson and the Yuriy for putting forth strong arguments. Thank you very much! Agree with your exposition of the 10 questions completely. I am 75 yrs. When the elders layed hands on me I heard the most beautiful choir singing but after the elders prayed and removed their hands I turned around and no one was there.
My language did not come out like many who speak, viz. The Spirit confirmed that you are right concerning your retort to question 6, viz. He taught me that a couple of years ago. There are times I find myself speaking in my heavenly language even at work or better still off and on all day. Many times, at first, I thought, why am I doing this! Thanks for your contribution as a witness to the Holy Spirit and the Power of God. He is the same yesterday, today and forever.
There is no shadow of turning. Your answers are completely correct. I have been Christian for 5 years and never spoke in tongues until a few weeks ago. I was baptised in the holy spirit. I believed for 5 years that tongues were real, I heard others speak in tongues, I just assumed that gift was not for me. If God wanted to give me that He will- otherwise Im ok just trusting in the Lord. I believe He gave me the gift when He did to build my faith and so that I could use it to edify the church and bring glory to His name.
The tongue to me sounded like some type of Arabic. I recorded the tongue on google voice and it did a translation to English. But I am sitting here on my couch- amazed by the Lord my God and the gift He has given to me. And the fact that I can speak a language and glorify Him in a language that I knew nothing about before. That phrase is taken out of 1 Corinthians People claim that Paul is somehow talking about a tongue unknown to mankind, or an angelic tongue of some sort. Paul is actually referring to a tongue language in which is unknown because none of the people spoke it.
In other words, a different human language. A better translation for this verse is the NASB. We may conclude that Jesus spoke against prayer which consisted of unintelligible speech or babbling, similar to the pagan prayers. Now we have to be careful with the word stammering. In the dictionary the word stammering means, to speak in repetitions, or utter involuntary pauses. That is why Charismatics like to pull out Isaiah The actual translation is 1.
Isaiah is not talking about stammering lips, but lips that spoke a barbarous or foreign tongue. This only goes to support the truth that tongues is really a foreign language. About verse 6, it is possible that there can be verifiable xenoglossy. And I believe those are most likely from those who are demon possessed.
Satan can speak different languages; I believe his demons can too. Satan has been here long enough to learn about mankind and their languages. And they said that this demon possessed person spoke in other languages that was not his own. And false christs and false prophets will perform great signs and wonders to deceive the people Mathew Even the beast in Revelation will work great miracles that the people will be deceived Rev False tongues is nothing new.
Paul wrote to correct and clarify the Corinthian church that no one speaking by the Spirit of God can say that Jesus is cursed 1 Corinthians False tongues were evident in the Corinthian church, which is why Paul had to go through the rules and placed high emphasis in edifying the church and not oneself. The gifts of the Spirit that are the most abused is the gift of prophecy, and tongues. The reason why is because both of these are the easiest to mimic and counterfeit. Paul had a terrible eye problem. He could not see well and states that the Galatians church would have done anything they could, even if they could pluck out their own eyes for him they would Galatians 4: Not only that, Paul traveled to visit many churches as well.
Paul was not able to heal him, but instead it was God who had mercy on him, so that he was near death, but did not die. Amateurs of any type often make the most meaningful discoveries, simply because they have no agenda involving their reputations, but do what they do because they love it. Give him a break, he is doing great and his answers are mostly right on, and way, way, way above what you will hear in church. I skimmed some parts of this, although I intend to come back to it. It should be noted, that the Apostles not only received Holy Spirit Baptism, they were able to impart it to others.
Those to whom it was imparted were not able to impart it to others. Scriptures make reference to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but not the continuation of the HS Baptism. Also, Paul alluded to the gifts ceasing. There is much more in scripture concerning the fruits of the Spirit than the gifts. The fruits never cease. I guess, according to your logic, sin is a really stupid thing that someone just came up with. Think really hard about what you believe. Logically, if you have sinned, or if you have seen someone else sin, and recognized it as sin, then sin exists when it logically, or as you would suppose idealistically cannot exist because it offends your sensibilities.
Think about it if you recognize good and bad, you recognize it for a reason. Wishing that hell does not exist is like wishing that sin does not exist, but it does and therefor hell does as well. Otherwise, do whatever you like because there are no consequences. Are you an anarchist? One does not need religion to create a complete system of ethics, please see http: Sometimes the best answer is a question, and the answer is best left unsaid because one wants to be neither right or wrong.
Sin cannot exist in this way of thinking because one must consider sin as a opinion rather than the fact. Starting with psychobabble does not make what you are saying truth. Why would anyone want to be neither right nor wrong? It is always desirable to be right. Otherwise you will accept the wrong and that is just wrong. Come on where is your head.
Sin is a fact when it is the opinion of a sinless God. Where do you stand? It is hard to stand when you are straddling a fence. Thank you for your list. I think 5 is one of the best reasons so many dispute the source of the charismatic movement. Your scripture quote is spot on, and some of your repliers seem to be blinded to scripture. May God continue Bless you. So long as we see a God that is so far beyond our understanding, and see our need for His grace to show us, He will be happy to reveal truth to us.
The natural man does not receive things of the Spirit of God. Keep humble and God will continue to teach. Thank you for your thoughtful and humble posts. You seem to be both honest and thorough in your exploration. It certainly helps to make the conversation easier and more fruitful without the incessant posturing on both sides.
My experience with speaking in tongues as a boy was maybe different from yours. I remember seeking this gift as the next step in my growth, around the age of One day after about three months of seeking this gift, was sitting at the dining room table, not praying or even thinking about the Holy Spirit Baptism, when I felt hot waves passing through me, like the hot air coming off a roaring campfire.
It felt liquid in nature, though, like something was being poured into me. As it worked its way through me, the warm water got to my mouth. I went into my bedroom to pray and before I even got to my knees a flood of words started coming out and I started crying. It subsided for a moment, and then started up again.
It was about 20 minutes of this. I felt a huge unspoken burden had been lifted. If I needed to think about something for example, pouring a glass of milk then I could do that. But as soon as I was finished with that task and released my mind from it, my attention would be snapped upwards again to focus on Jesus. The reason I go into such detail about this is to ask about your experience. Your post recently mentioned that you could still pray in tongues, even after having decided that it was not a divine sign of anything. And now that you believe this is a real, but non-divine phenomenon, does any of my experience above fit into your experience?
Hi Red, your experience is really different from what I have generally observed. Can you give me your email id so that I can ask you some more questions? I really believe you had a true experience of speaking in tongues. I believe many people pretend, or are confused on the issue, and that is where this man is coming from, but you have had the real deal. I have had a similar experience where I was net even expecting it but it came.
Just remember, and you can search this for yourself in acts 1: You have experienced the real deal. Nurture it, keep it pure, and allow God to work his power in you to be His witness. There are a lot of distractions. Keep you eye on the mark of being real with God, and He will guide you. I had been very hungry to receive this gift for a couple of years before it happened.
I felt fire in my belly rising before it happened. So, my question after all this is for Yuriy..
1. Why do different charismatic groups have different vowels and accents of glossolalia?
Why would I experience this if this was not of God? But if so, why woul I have heard the word Holy in my spirit in that season in my life of praying in tongues so much for those months? One of the best lve read and lve read a bunch on it. Been writing a manuscript on this subject. Thought I might use a couple of your points ld give you credit. Corinth never had real tongues and Paul knew it. BTW again concerning Acts 19 Paul was the unbeliever there.
They were talking to him. I can still do it. Even when I was a Christian, I had some questions about this experience. I noticed, for example, that while I spoke a wide range of different sounds, and my glossolalia could easily have been mistaken for a European language by an observer, I knew people whose prayer language never went beyond repeating the same four or five different syllables. They could have said a wider range of things in English. Thank you for the article. I received a prayer language about a week an a half ago. I have been seeking it for about two years. I was fully expecting to have an experience such as Reds but that has definitely not been the case.
I have been told that it is the evidence of the filling of the Holy Spirit and without the evidence of speaking in tongues I am not Spirit filled. This has brought much heartache to me. I know I am not responding to the article per say but I was hoping maybe someone could give me insight. Tongues cannot be taught. And it is not required, to be blunt.
- Please Note:;
- Tongue Problems: Sores, Discoloration, and Tongue Bumps.
- The Gnostic Gospels!
- Lifes A Dance.
- Business Intelligence For Dummies;
If you feel a power overcome you with inexplicable sensations, you may have been filled. However, tongues are a good sign. There is a way to be fooled into believing you have been filled, even by your own mind. You may want to change churches too, if they are teaching it. It is strictly between you, and God. Be careful, be honest with God, and others, but mostly with God. He works in mysterious ways, and our ways are not his ways. His ways are higher. Also, live modeling of glossolalia, direct instruction, and encouragement were provided by an experimenter.
Both the trained [subjects] and untreated controls attempted to produce glossolalia on a sec post test trial. Findings are more consistent with social learning than with altered state conceptions of glossolalia. Kildahl, John; Paul Qualben Glossolalia and Mental Health: National Institute of Mental Health.
Anyone who claims to be able to teach tongues is a charlatan. Just as only one artist can produce what is recognized as a masterpiece, all others are fakes and counterfeits. You claim to have spoken in tongues, but I do not believe you ever truly have. This is possibly because it requires a person to trust God enough to risk looking a little foolish, and this is a necessary training ground for the other gifts. It feels exactly similar to speaking any language other than your mother tongue. And we all feel minor embarrassment when speaking in a foreign language in front of someone else.
The gift of tongues produces a similar effect to saying the rosary. Most people have had the experience of saying the rosary and getting lost in thought or meditation and your saying of the words becomes almost background noise because you are not paying attention to the words. It is a gift that lets the heart - through the Holy Spirit - speak to God. Most of the time when the gift of tongues is in use, we have no idea what we are babbling about to God; but we know that God knows. When that happens Romans 8: For when we cannot choose words in order to pray properly, the Spirit Himself expresses our plea in a way that could never be put into words, and God Who knows everything in our hearts knows perfectly well what He means, and that the pleas of the saints expressed by the Spirit are according to the mind of God.
It is a gift that God never forces upon anyone. True, sometimes it is given spontaneously by Him at moments of great joy or intense sorrow, but normally we have to specifically ask for it and then wait for His perfect timing to receive it. This gift teaches us that it is truly God who prays in us, as the scriptures tell us He does. It is also a gift that brings unity and harmony when people pray in this gift together to God. The gift of tongues is like the plug that goes into an electric socket.
All prayer does this, but praying in tongues appears to have a particular efficacy. The gift of interpretation of tongues is a far less ordinary gift, due in big part to the large degree of trust a person has to have in God for God to be able to use them. The trust is needed on the part of the person God calls to speak out loud in a tongue.
It is a gift only given when a group prays together. The members of the prayer group are alerted by this first charism that the good Lord has some rather important message to give. The prayer group then prays for an interpretation, and waits. The praying opens hearts further to listen and receive the message. Usually more than one person receives an interpretation and they confirm the message.
There is also a lesser manifestation of this gift when a passage of scripture is being read out loud, and you hear an inner voice from God giving a particular line by line application of that scripture to your life or to a specific situation. Because God is God, He is not limited by our preferred ways of doing things. Talking donkeys, burning bushes and being asked to go to Straight Street to meet a determined persecutor etc, are all unusual things God has done in the past.
We might think speaking in tongues falls into this category, however there is ample evidence in the New Testament that the Apostles and other early Christians saw speaking in tongues as a gift from God to those who accepted Jesus as Saviour and were baptized. It is a worthwhile project to find a concordance online or book and to look up all of the scripture references to speaking in tongues. Dear God, that You have strange gifts to give like this gift of tongues puzzles me.
I don't usually associate weird stuff with You.