Posted by Kavik
One of the issues for me is that there are no reported proven examples of xenoglossy – anywhere.
How can you make that assertion? That's not a rational statement unless you claim to be omniscient. Pneumareview, I think, had an article up about a documented case of speaking in tongues housed at a non-Charismatic Lutheran seminary library as while back.
OK – perhaps phrased wrong – There are no documented provable cases of xenoglossy. In every case of reported xenoglossy which has ever been studied, the speaker was found to have been exposed to the target language (either consciously or subconsciously) at some point in their life.
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.
From a Biblical perspective, the testimony of two or three witnesses is a means of establishing evidence.
Perhaps back then yes, but in modern times it’s easy enough (in theory) to prove or disprove in more concrete ways than just hearsay.
I've read and heard a number of accounts of people who spoke in tongues at the Azusa Street revival, where what they spoke in tongues was understood by a native speaker. LA was an international city with Russian, Spanish, Japanese, etc. speakers. A preacher who went to Azusa Street named Garr spoke in tongues, a language which did not sound like what he experienced when he normally spoke in tongues, and an Indian identified it as Bengali. When he went to India, he found out that he couldn't make whatever tongue he spoke be the language of the region there.
Missionaries from the Azusa Street Revival were convinced that what they were doing was xenoglossy and that language learning was completely unnecessary – upon arrival in various countries not one could even communicate basic day to day needs. Garr was convinced he could speak Bengali and his wife, Chinese. One way he was convinced was that two Indian boys told him he was speaking Bengali (were they serious or were they just humoring him or just having a bit of fun at his expense – one has to wonder). In any event, after arriving in India he quickly discovered no one understood a word he said in T-speech.
The result of these missionary ‘experiments’ was that Pentecostals were quickly becoming skeptical of tongues in general. After repeated proof that these tongues were not examples of xenoglossia, Parham’s doctrine of tongues had to be completely revamped. Pentecostalism had to rethink the entire phenomenon. They now needed another explanation for what they were practicing since it became painfully obvious real languages was not it – the end result was the modern Pentecostal “re-definition”, so to speak, of tongues as “heavenly languages” or “prayer languages” (rather than real languages).
I haven't recognized speaking in tongues in my own language, but I've spoken with two people who have experienced speaking in tongues and someone else identified what they spoke as utterance in their own language, and one person who heard a Chinese grandma in a remote village in China speaking in tongues in English. She said it sounded like speaking a Psalm. I also correspond with a theologian and pastor on Facebook who knows of two German-speaking Europeans who don't know English but speak it in tongues. One speaks KJV English.
That’s possible but again, no idea as to whether or not the speakers ever had exposure to the target language – was it dialogue, short monologue, a phrase or two or just a few words.
Who said it sounded like speaking a psalm? The person who recognized it as English (who presumably would have known that she was saying), or the speaker?
German speaking Europeans who don’t know English is a virtual oxymoron; English is a required subject in schools in Germany and I dare say a good 30% of modern spoken German one hears on the streets is comprised of English. And that was 30 years ago – can’t even imagine how much that’s increased since then. I can’t regard that as report as legit.
I don't buy your theory that English and Spanish are so common people can speak the languages without ever learning them. If your brother can speak Spanish, he must have had enough 'contextual' exposure to it for it to make sense to him. Linguists have found that German kids who watched Dutch cartoons over a relatively long period of time did not pick up the language. But these languages are quite common in parts of the world, and it is more believable for the skeptic that an individual in Asia had never learned Lithuanian or Mayan than English.
No, I’m not saying people can speak them with a good degree of fluency, but I’m certainly suggesting that they are common enough so that people can pick up quite a few words and phrases. At least here in North America with respect to Spanish. As one small example, walk into a Lowe’s or Home Depot and every single thing printed with respect to store signage, directions, policies, etc. is translated right there in front of you. With English, it’s a required subject in more countries than it is not. You’d have to make a pretty good effort to avoid it.
Dutch vs. German – I’d have to know more about the experiment. Dutch and German are close enough – I’m not sure they’d necessarily need to pick it up to be able to speak it, but it really depends on the situation.
Kavik wrote
Interpretation may again also be inspired by one’s deep faith and beliefs, but the relatively generic messages of most interpretations do not suggest anything that is divinely inspired. This is clearly evidenced in that if one gives the same glossic string to ten different people who can interpret tongues, one will get ten different interpretations typically non-related to each other. In this respect, glossolalia fails even the most basic criteria which define communication itself, let alone language.
I have never experienced one tongue being intepreted multiple ways. Most of us probably haven't seen such a thing, or don't know of evidence for this. I suppose someone could wrongly interpret tongues. And there could be someone who gets a prophecy and doesn't differentiate whether it is a tongue or a prophecy, and the silence after a tongue is given is the chance to prophecy.
Examples such as this were mainly the result of studies done – not sure it would occur in a “natural” setting due to the rules of interpretation (assuming they’re being followed). In one example done in France, what was spoken and given to people to interpret was done in a set; one part was legitimate T-speech, the other was the Lord’s Prayer recited in a very broad Scots - various interpretations were offered for both. Multiple interpretations for the same glossic string is the usual result in studies.
Be that as it may, I have known a couple of people who have experienced a situation where someone spoke in tongues and they got the interpretation, but someone else gave the same interpretation before they could say it. My college roommate experienced that. I knew someone who experienced that with giving a prophecy. I've gotten a word of knowledge a couple of times and someone else gave it as a part of a prophecy before I could say it.
That first sentence sounds a bit dubious – “hey, that’s just what I was gonna say” – not sure I can regard that with any degree of legitimacy.
Can you elaborate on your last statement - Can you give an example (even if it’s hypothetical)?
I've also experienced going to one church in one town, someone prophesies something over me, and then someone in another two I go to prophesies that again, or multiple people prophesying or getting words of knowledge about the same thing. The Spirit witnessed to Paul, he said, in every city, of what awaited him in Jerusalem. So this sort of thing happened in the first century, too.
Again, I’m not sure I understand what you mean by prophesy – can you give an example?
Posted by Garee –
When Peter spoke, the Holy Spirit that dwelt in Peter having put His words in Peters mouth (prophecy) every nation under heaven (no one knows how many) heard it to the salvation of their soul. They heard it in their own language, as God gave each one of them his interpretation in their own tongues. Neither tongues nor prophecy is after any man, as a sign a person is with God.
Well, actually we do know – every nation under heaven is an idiomatic expression; like forty days and forty nights – it’s not intended to be taken literally. We are told a bit later in the narrative where the people were from. This is the list given in Acts that most people interpret to refer to languages. It’s a list of places, not languages. If it’s examined, we realize it’s a list of the lands of the Jewish Diaspora (though there are two missing).
