A bit of a delayed response to several previous posts in no particular order–
First let me be clear – I do not mean this to sound insulting in the least; however since it’s sort of been brought up.….There are many paths to the Light (God, the Creator, the Deity, the One, whichever name you wish to use); yours is by far not the only path and, contrary to what you may think or have been taught to believe, your particular path is no better than any other.
I have only recently become aware of the terms “cessationsit” and “continuationist” – had no clue what they really meant and admittedly had to google the definitions. Having done that, I do not identify with either. As far as ‘tongues’ are concerned; since the Biblical term “tongues” refers to real language(s), obviously, they haven’t ‘ceased’; people still speak.
Digressing a bit here, but part of the issue for me is the insistence on using 16[SUP]th[/SUP] century English and its misinterpretation into modern English – ‘tongue(s)’ is/was just an older term for ‘language’ – nothing more mysterious than that. We still occasionally use the term today to clearly refer to real languages. We speak of a person’s “mother tongue”, a “native tongue” of a particular country or region, etc. Clearly the reference is to real language. I don’t know if it’s because the word ‘language’ is not specifically used that when one sees ‘tongues’ it’s automatically assumed to be something outside the realm of everyday speech (?).
The term ‘interpretation’ equates to ‘translation’ – the difference between the two terms is a bit subtle; in a nutshell, both mean to render language ‘X’ into language ‘Y’; interpretation however typically refers to something spoken whilst translation typically refers to something written. We speak of someone needing an interpreter to discuss, say their medical concerns to a doctor, but if that same person has a document in the language, a translator is called; not an interpreter. To “interpret a tongue” is simply to “translate a language”, nothing more.
I am not here to argue religious beliefs nor do I expect to change anyone’s beliefs. I do have strong views about the subject and what is presented is simply another way of looking at this phenomenon. The subject of tongues has always interested me but I never really looked into it until fairly recently. The more I study the phenomenon, the more I have come to realize that the ‘tongues’ of the Bible and the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic practice are two completely different things entirely. The former concerns itself with real language(s), the latter with glossolalia/non-cognitive non-language utterances. I’m in no way suggesting that modern tongues are wrong, but with all due respect, I don’t think they’re quite what you’d like them to be either.
I do understand that your particular Christian path is more than just the Bible – I say your particular path as the term ‘Christian’ for me is defined as anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus; regardless their particular denomination. I would hope that for most, their faith is also a way of life. But again, yours is not the only denomination (or religion for that matter) where people try to live their faith.
That said, I do not believe that everything in the Bible needs to be, or was ever intended to be, supernatural, mysterious, or even divine (and before you even wonder, no, I’m not an atheist)– sometimes it just describes the real-life events of a given time period. Take Paul’s letter for example. It’s just that; a letter. I’m pretty sure when he wrote that response he wasn’t expecting his letter to last more than twenty years, let alone 2,000. Presumably it was written in response to someone writing to him describing, among other things, the communication issues in Corinth that had developed at public worships. Corinth was a multi-cultural, multi-lingual city on not one, but two ports. Paul is simply responding to what must have been a very common problem; the issue of mutual intelligibility in a city where not everyone spoke Greek equally as well. A city where one could walk the streets and probably hear several different languages in a matter of an hour, if that – I mean, I hear more than that just stopping in at my local supermarket on a Thursday night; it’s like a virtual UN (and I live in a relatively small city in New England)!
OK – enough digression…..
Yes, to some degree it is still ongoing research – there are things to learn on both sides of the coin. The nice thing about ‘tongues’ is that they are something concrete and tangible. They can be and have been studied and analyzed.
Some of the natural questions that arise with tongues are, what is being produced? What is the linguistic make-up of T-speech? Does it have a grammar? Does it have a lexicon? Is it one ‘universal language’ or is it specific to each speaker? Is it simply the Christian form of glossolalia? How is it ‘interpreted’/translated? Is translation consistent? The list goes on. Fortunately, all these questions can be (and for the most part have been) answered.
To someone’s post – “Can God do today what he did back then?” Of course he can. Why wouldn’t he be able to? As far as this question goes with respect to tongues, I’ve answered that above – people still speak; thus, languages have not stopped. Most people refer to 1.Cor. 13:8 with respect to “tongues ceasing” but of course, that passage, as well as any other Biblical passage, is pretty open to various interpretation. Usually said interpretation is tailored to fit the beliefs of a particular group whether it be ‘pro’ or ‘con’.
Some questions to consider…..
With respect to Biblical ‘tongues’, what makes you think they are not in reference to real language??
With respect to ‘modern tongues’, what makes you think they are some sort of language??
What makes you think that the glossolalia/tongues of say an Evenki shaman is any different or any less divine than your tongue(s)?
If you hear T-speech and think it is somehow ‘demonic’ – what makes you think that?? The speaker, the tone, intonation, the actual sounds themselves?
Have you ever recorded yourself speaking in tongues and then played it back and really listened to what you were producing??
How do you account for multiple, unrelated, interpretations of the same utterance??
I did ask a series of questions in the original post, but haven’t really gotten any concrete answers.
One of the issues for me is that there are no reported proven examples of xenoglossy – anywhere. In every case that has ever been studied, the speaker was at some time in one way or another exposed to the foreign language s/he spoke. Despite this, the Pentecostal/Charismatic community seems to be rife with examples of xenoglossy. As someone stated, they do not speak Spanish, yet supposedly uttered something in the language when speaking in tongues.
Again, these are things which are tangible – they can be studied and analyzed.
My questions would be – what was spoken, a dialogue, a paragraph, a sentence or just a phrase spoken over and over?? What is the person’s (speaker’s) background? Have they ever been exposed to the language they spoke?
languages like Spanish or English are inherently problematic; whether Spanish here in North America or English virtually anywhere else in the world, one big problem is that that they are just way too darn common a language for the speaker not to have been exposed to them. Spanish is a language my brother has never studied, but he can carry on a fairly simple conversation just from hearing it on the streets and being more subconsciously exposed to it that way.
So, it kind of begs the question of what exactly is going on in these examples?? Yes, it’s easy to say that God gave me the ability to speak this language, but what is actually being said? Not to pick on Spanish, but, what would a non-Spanish speaking bystander hear from the speaker addressing the listener, Spanish or glossolalia? What is actually heard by the person the speaker is addressing? Are they physically hearing Spanish, or subconsciously getting a “message” revealed to them (subconsciously) in Spanish? In short is what’s happening in these types of incidents; true xenoglossy or something completely different but perceived as xenoglossy?
I think the above are all legitimate questions and ones that are not defined by one’s faith.
Some people have told me that I am trying to define something supernatural in natural terms, but honestly, I’m kind of having a hard time buying that because I’m just not seeing anything supernatural here; there’s nothing that’s being done that can’t be defined in normal natural terms.
Ultimately however, I think it simply boils down to you either subscribe to tongues as something supernatural and divine, or you don’t – not sure there’s really any middle ground.