Speaking in tongues

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Oct 24, 2018
473
87
28
Hi thanks for the reply .

Not sure what you mean by Replacement Theology? Are you saying because I offered that God mocked or derided the unbelieving Jew who mocked Him by refusing to hear his prophecy...….. replaces something?


The word stammering is used three times. Isaiah 32 paints of a beautiful picture of the gospel, converting the mocking or deriding tongue (stammerers) as those who have not faith. They will hear the gospel (the ears of them that hear shall listen.) and believe in Christ our hiding place from the storms of the tempest.


Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment. And a man shall be as an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land. And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall listen. The heart also of the rash shall understand knowledge, and the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly. Isaiah 32:1-4



Question: "What is replacement theology?"

Answer: Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel. Among the different views of the relationship between the church and Israel are the church has replaced Israel (replacement theology), the church is an expansion of Israel (covenant theology), or the church is completely different and distinct from Israel (dispensationalism/premillennialism).

Replacement theology teaches that the church is the replacement for Israel and that the many promises made to Israel in the Bible are fulfilled in the Christian church, not in Israel. The prophecies in Scripture concerning the blessing and restoration of Israel to the Promised Land are spiritualized or allegorized into promises of God’s blessing for the church. Major problems exist with this view, such as the continuing existence of the Jewish people throughout the centuries and especially with the revival of the modern state of Israel. If Israel has been condemned by God and there is no future for the Jewish nation, how do we explain the supernatural survival of the Jewish people over the past 2,000 years despite the many attempts to destroy them? How do we explain why and how Israel reappeared as a nation in the 20th century after not existing for 1,900 years?

The view that Israel and the church are different is clearly taught in the New Testament. Biblically speaking, the church is distinct from Israel, and the terms church and Israel are never to be confused or used interchangeably. We are taught from Scripture that the church is an entirely new creation that came into being on the day of Pentecost and will continue until it is taken to heaven at the rapture (Ephesians 1:9–11; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–17). The church has no relationship to the curses and blessings for Israel. The covenants, promises, and warnings of the Mosaic Covenant were valid only for Israel. Israel has been temporarily set aside in God’s program during these past 2,000 years of dispersion (see Romans 11).

Contrary to replacement theology, dispensationalism teaches that, after the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:13–18), God will restore Israel as the primary focus of His plan. The first event at this time is the tribulation (Revelation chapters 6–19). The world will be judged for rejecting Christ, while Israel is prepared through the trials of the great tribulation for the second coming of the Messiah. Then, when Christ does return to the earth at the end of the tribulation, Israel will be ready to receive Him. The remnant of Israel who survive the tribulation will be saved, and the Lord will establish His kingdom on this earth with Jerusalem as its capital. With Christ reigning as King, Israel will be the leading nation, and representatives from all nations will come to Jerusalem to honor and worship the King—Jesus Christ. The church will return with Christ and will reign with Him for a literal thousand years (Revelation 20:1–5).

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament support a premillennial/dispensational understanding of God’s plan for Israel. The strongest support for premillennialism is found in the clear teaching of Revelation 20:1–7, where it says six times that Christ’s kingdom will last 1,000 years. After the tribulation the Lord will return and establish His kingdom with the nation of Israel, Christ will reign over the whole earth, and Israel will be the leader of the nations. The church will reign with Him for a literal thousand years. The church has not replaced Israel in God's plan. While God may be focusing His attention primarily on the church in this dispensation of grace, God has not forgotten Israel and will one day restore Israel to His intended role as the nation He has chosen (Romans 11).
 
Oct 24, 2018
473
87
28
It clearly does not say tongues which is God speaking in other languages other that Hebrew as mocking the apostate Jews who refuse to hear prophecy alone, is not prophecy . tongues is prophecy.

For one the word unknown was added. Which is not the same as unknowable.

The langue of God's interpretation to all of the nations might be unknown to the speaker but not to those who received the prophecy of God .They heard God loud and clear and is why they rejoiced without looking for someone to interrupt a noise.

God does not make a noise and say go look for someone's idea of what they think it means . That would be promoting a private interpretation and not a personal relationship with one who say to seek His approval and not the witness of men as a private interpretation.

God is the speaker in all cases . That treasure we have in us is not of us. Its a gift of His Spirit not ours .

1 Corinthians 14 King James Version (KJV) Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.



***About What Follows Being Filled with the Holy Spirit-- https://app.box.com/s/huj8qk1ibholuugtilvqmhb0gei6anx7
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,511
9,592
113
It clearly does not say tongues which is God speaking in other languages other that Hebrew as mocking the apostate Jews who refuse to hear prophecy alone, is not prophecy . tongues is prophecy.

For one the word unknown was added. Which is not the same as unknowable.
Your logic is flawed and your comprehension is darkened on this matter. Even the verses you quote further down say clearly that the one who speaks in a tongue speaks to God, while the one who prophesies speaks to men. They cannot be the same thing.

The langue of God's interpretation to all of the nations might be unknown to the speaker but not to those who received the prophecy of God .They heard God loud and clear and is why they rejoiced without looking for someone to interrupt a noise.

God does not make a noise and say go look for someone's idea of what they think it means . That would be promoting a private interpretation and not a personal relationship with one who say to seek His approval and not the witness of men as a private interpretation.
You continually badly misrepresent my position and argue against what I have not claimed. You also badly misinterpret 2 Peter 1:20.

God is the speaker in all cases . That treasure we have in us is not of us. Its a gift of His Spirit not ours .

1 Corinthians 14 King James Version (KJV) Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
Okay, let's examine this idea that God is the speaker. Here are several more verses following...

4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

And a few verses further on...

13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

and one more:

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

If God is doing the speaking in every case, then Paul is a liar and a false teacher. God the Holy Spirit is empowering the human speaker or, to put it another way, providing the message, but not doing the speaking.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,511
9,592
113
Not caring whether one violates the commandment as a warning not to add or subtract from the perfect as in complete seems to agree with the Catholic folly.
Once again you misrepresent what I wrote.

You said..........."I don't agree that the completed canon is the "perfect" to which Paul refers in 13:8. Any argument with such a view as its basis I will therefore reject".

Why go above that which is written and seek to add to the book of prophecy, the Bible? Is there a law missing by which we could know him more adequately?
Either quote where I advocate that or stop using it in your responses to me. It's ridiculous that you keep repeating it.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
6,436
905
113
Garee,
Paul wrote I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied.

Clearly Paul uses these terms to refer to two different things.

Paul says he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues unless he interprets?


Have you ever actually read the whole chapter? Can you see the words on the page when you read? Can you compregend what the words say? I am honestly trying to understand what the disconnect is
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
6,436
905
113
Thats Why we have so much different Doctrines, because People think they can easily make Doctrines After that what they wish.
For example: Joel 2 is often used from pentecostal and charismatics for their doctrine. But if you read the context from Joel 2, then you find out this will happend when Israel is living in a peace situation and is Adressed only to the Jewish Nation. And even Peter mentioned this in Acts 2 it is not a whole fulfilling, because only a Minority of Jewish People expierience this. It simply not fit in the context of Joel 2.
But People have no problem to Take the vers out of the context to Support their view.
Peter is the one who interprets Joel. We also have to be aware that the apostles were not bound by Protestant method of hermenuetics. For example, 'Out of Egypt have I called my son' had an application right there in the original passage to Ephraim, the ruling tribe of Israel, the northern kingdom. But the verse applied prophetically to Christ. Isaiah 11:28 is used in I Corinthians 14 about speaking in tongues. But we know from history and other passages in the Bible that the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom, and they spoke Aramaic and whatever other languages they spoke in their empire. They took Israel away captive, marching them away naked, probably yelling at them in (a) foreign language(s).

Peter is the one who applies Joel 2 to the situation in Acts 2. Pentecostals and Charismatics follow his lead. In other passages, we see that the Spirit is given as a downpayment or earnest of something we receive later. In Romans 8, we receive the firstfruit of the Spirit and we await the redemption of our bodies. The fullest extent of the outpouring of the Spirit may occur in a more idealic time, but the beginnings of it were at or before the events described in Acts 2.

The passage also says that the Lord will pour out His Spirit on all flesh. Peter concludes that the promise of the Spirit is even for those who are afar off. Paul described Gentiles as those who were afar off.

To Read the Text is not Eisegese, to put your meaning in is Eisegese.
Of course not, but to read one's own ideas into scripture is. For example, if you read a motive for God doing something into a passage when that idea is not taught or hinted at, you may be eisegeting. For example, if you assume that the reason the Spirit came upon those who believed and were baptized after a delay-- however long it took for Paul to lay hands on them-- was because God wanted to prove something about disciples of John the Baptist being received, that's eisegesis.

Think about the historical context. They were in Ephesus, far from the temple in Jerusalem. There was a synagogue there, probably a Hellenistic synagogue as in other cities. John the Baptist was received by the people in Israel as a prophet, and the priests were afraid to speak ill of him in the temple because the people accepted him as a prophet.

At least one of John's disciples (Andrew) and possibly two (see Johne 1) had already been baptized with the Holy Spirit in Acts 2. Why would there need to be special proof that disciples of a man Jesus' praised could become Christians? I think that is one of the clearest examples of eisegesis.

For example Acts 19. It may be right that in this moment there where no Jewish officials eyewitness.
Do you want to eisegete the idea into the text that some Jewish officials were there? What kind of officials, way up in Ephesus?
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
7,186
2,060
113
There are two very dangerous Teachings today

one is: We don't need the Word of God ( bible) because the Holy Spirit will teach us everything we need and even teach us things the Word of God does not say.


Two is: Attack on the Holy Spirit today to the point of no acknowledgment, or reverence for. " I know more of the Bible" "so I don't need the Holy Spirit " we have the Bible".

Both thoughts are prideful and error, yet both thoughts have been said here by some.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113


Question: "What is replacement theology?"

Answer: Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel. Among the different views of the relationship between the church and Israel are the church has replaced Israel (replacement theology), the church is an expansion of Israel (covenant theology), or the church is completely different and distinct from Israel (dispensationalism/premillennialism).

Replacement theology teaches that the church is the replacement for Israel and that the many promises made to Israel in the Bible are fulfilled in the Christian church, not in Israel. The prophecies in Scripture concerning the blessing and restoration of Israel to the Promised Land are spiritualized or allegorized into promises of God’s blessing for the church. Major problems exist with this view, such as the continuing existence of the Jewish people throughout the centuries and especially with the revival of the modern state of Israel. If Israel has been condemned by God and there is no future for the Jewish nation, how do we explain the supernatural survival of the Jewish people over the past 2,000 years despite the many attempts to destroy them? How do we explain why and how Israel reappeared as a nation in the 20th century after not existing for 1,900 years?

The view that Israel and the church are different is clearly taught in the New Testament. Biblically speaking, the church is distinct from Israel, and the terms church and Israel are never to be confused or used interchangeably. We are taught from Scripture that the church is an entirely new creation that came into being on the day of Pentecost and will continue until it is taken to heaven at the rapture (Ephesians 1:9–11; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–17). The church has no relationship to the curses and blessings for Israel. The covenants, promises, and warnings of the Mosaic Covenant were valid only for Israel. Israel has been temporarily set aside in God’s program during these past 2,000 years of dispersion (see Romans 11).

Contrary to replacement theology, dispensationalism teaches that, after the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:13–18), God will restore Israel as the primary focus of His plan. The first event at this time is the tribulation (Revelation chapters 6–19). The world will be judged for rejecting Christ, while Israel is prepared through the trials of the great tribulation for the second coming of the Messiah. Then, when Christ does return to the earth at the end of the tribulation, Israel will be ready to receive Him. The remnant of Israel who survive the tribulation will be saved, and the Lord will establish His kingdom on this earth with Jerusalem as its capital. With Christ reigning as King, Israel will be the leading nation, and representatives from all nations will come to Jerusalem to honor and worship the King—Jesus Christ. The church will return with Christ and will reign with Him for a literal thousand years (Revelation 20:1–5).

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament support a premillennial/dispensational understanding of God’s plan for Israel. The strongest support for premillennialism is found in the clear teaching of Revelation 20:1–7, where it says six times that Christ’s kingdom will last 1,000 years. After the tribulation the Lord will return and establish His kingdom with the nation of Israel, Christ will reign over the whole earth, and Israel will be the leader of the nations. The church will reign with Him for a literal thousand years. The church has not replaced Israel in God's plan. While God may be focusing His attention primarily on the church in this dispensation of grace, God has not forgotten Israel and will one day restore Israel to His intended role as the nation He has chosen (Romans 11).
Which Israel is that which one has been replaced? The one he renamed Christian as residents of the city of Christ that he has called to be His bride?
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
Your logic is flawed and your comprehension is darkened on this matter. Even the verses you quote further down say clearly that the one who speaks in a tongue speaks to God, while the one who prophesies speaks to men. They cannot be the same thing.
The scripture does not read, one who speaks in a tongue speaks to God, while the one who prophesies speaks to men......as if it was two events

I would think the phrase "unto God " would be in agreement with .

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?Amos 3:3

His doctrines fall from heaven and are not inspired from earth or understood by seeking the understanding of men . For no man seeks after God. He speaks to us in mysteries or parables.

God put his words on Peter lips and God (not man) interpreted into many tongues just what was on His mind .As a result those who were given ears to hear believed God as a clear understanding what God said... and not man .He is the one and only interpreter . You could say he forbids us from saying we need a man seen to teach us.

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth (God's word) speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort 1 Coerintians 14:2
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
You continually badly misrepresent my position and argue against what I have not claimed. You also badly misinterpret 2 Peter 1:20.

In the reference where God warns us of the antichrist he informs us of those who say we do need a man to teach us a as private interpretation.

I think we could say God forbid let God be true and every man a liar .

He would not I believe God lovingly commands us to study rightfully dividing His word in order to seek His approval and then say if you hear a noise look for a private interpretation of men as seeking after their approval .Its all about a personal relationship with God as two walking together agree to one .

Tongues is God bringing his living abiding word in all the languges of the word and not Hebrew alone is prophecy .It is a sign aginst the Hebrews who refused to hear prophecy (God word)


Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.2 Peter 1:20-21
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
Peter is the one who applies Joel 2 to the situation in Acts 2. Pentecostals and Charismatics follow his lead. In other passages, we see that the Spirit is given as a downpayment or earnest of something we receive later. In Romans 8, we receive the firstfruit of the Spirit and we await the redemption of our bodies. The fullest extent of the outpouring of the Spirit may occur in a more idealic time, but the beginnings of it were at or before the events described in Acts 2.
It would seem you are adding a new meaning to the word apostle which simply means sent one with no other meaning added. Moses was sent by God. Abel was sent by God. All prophets are sent ones sent with the word of God .

The Holy Spirit and not Peter applies Joel 2 to the situation in Acts 2.

We are not to think of the apostles (sent ones) above the word of God, prophecy as that which they are sent with

In Jerimiah 1 knowing from Job 23 that it is God who performs that which he appoints to us as he works in us to both will and do His good pleasure as a imputed righteousness. He is shown giving the word to Jeramiah and watching to make sure he performs them. The metaphor rod of a almond tree speaks of His authority as a sign against those who believe not (no faith)

Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Jeremiah, what seest thou? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree.
Then said the Lord unto me, Thou hast well seen: for I will hasten my word to perform it.Jerimiah 1:11-12
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,511
9,592
113
The scripture does not read, one who speaks in a tongue speaks to God, while the one who prophesies speaks to men......as if it was two events
It does in the NIV. It even does in the KJV, just with the word "unto" instead of the word "to". They mean the same thing.

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

It is patently clear: tongues are spoken to God, while prophecies are spoken to men. They are different. It is just baffling that you can't see it.


I would think the phrase "unto God " would be in agreement with .

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?Amos 3:3
You're assuming connections where none are stated in the text. "Unto God" in 16th century English means "to God" in current English.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,511
9,592
113
In the reference where God warns us of the antichrist he informs us of those who say we do need a man to teach us a as private interpretation.
2 Peter 1 does not speak of the antichrist. That isn't until chapter 2, but it doesn't change the interpretation of 1:20. The verse, as you quoted, talks about the origin of prophecy. It does not forbid private interpretation. That much is abundantly clear!

He would not I believe God lovingly commands us to study rightfully dividing His word in order to seek His approval and then say if you hear a noise look for a private interpretation of men as seeking after their approval .
He doesn't... anywhere. You're twisting Scripture and committing a straw man fallacy.

By the way, "study" in the KJV passage you reference does not mean "study" in 21st century English. Rather, it means, "be diligent" as a review of modern translations will attest.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
7,186
2,060
113
The scripture does not read, one who speaks in a tongue speaks to God, while the one who prophesies speaks to men......as if it was two events

I would think the phrase "unto God " would be in agreement with .

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?Amos 3:3

His doctrines fall from heaven and are not inspired from earth or understood by seeking the understanding of men . For no man seeks after God. He speaks to us in mysteries or parables.

God put his words on Peter lips and God (not man) interpreted into many tongues just what was on His mind .As a result those who were given ears to hear believed God as a clear understanding what God said... and not man .He is the one and only interpreter . You could say he forbids us from saying we need a man seen to teach us.

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth (God's word) speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort 1 Coerintians 14:2
you are Allegorizing
 

Merida

Active member
Oct 26, 2018
107
61
28
My Mom told me last night that when she took a Bible study class once, a guy in the class suddenly started speaking in tongues, and people were shocked. He was shocked too. It scared my Mom, and she said it always disturbed her. She said it was very, very real.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
2 Peter 1 does not speak of the antichrist. That isn't until chapter 2, but it doesn't change the interpretation of 1:20. The verse, as you quoted, talks about the origin of prophecy. It does not forbid private interpretation. That much is abundantly clear!



He doesn't... anywhere. You're twisting Scripture and committing a straw man fallacy.

By the way, "study" in the KJV passage you reference does not mean "study" in 21st century English. Rather, it means, "be diligent" as a review of modern translations will attest.

Did you mean be diligent and study to show one approved to God? Other wise what are we to be diligent to do? And for what purpose?


Insisting a man must interpret rather than the one interpreter of his word does spell antichrists . Again God does not make a noise like children clanging together kettles and say go find someone to give you the proper spiritual understanding.

God gave them his prophecy in a language that they could believe God as to walking together in agreement with the one who brings the prophecy to the ear of another. Not the understanding of the television evangelist even if it agree with God's interpretation

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.
These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. 1 John 2:22-27
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
you are Allegorizing

I think it what God does with his signified language hides the spiritual meaning in parables called "hidden manna" in Revelation . The word manna when defined means "what it is it"?. God does not accept familiarity with His new creation. He is not a man as us .

How much is too much or is it no allegorizing, but only literalizing ?.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
My Mom told me last night that when she took a Bible study class once, a guy in the class suddenly started speaking in tongues, and people were shocked. He was shocked too. It scared my Mom, and she said it always disturbed her. She said it was very, very real.
Although God is no longer brining any new prophecy as a revelations of God, the air way is still open to false prophecy .

I would say very real. So real that God sends a strong delusion so that the lie can be believed because they did not love the truth of God.

I would be careful as to how we can hear God. Not saying a person is not saved.

Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:2 Thessalonians 2:9-11
 

Merida

Active member
Oct 26, 2018
107
61
28
Although God is no longer brining any new prophecy as a revelations of God, the air way is still open to false prophecy .

I would say very real. So real that God sends a strong delusion so that the lie can be believed because they did not love the truth of God.

I would be careful as to how we can hear God. Not saying a person is not saved.

Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:2 Thessalonians 2:9-11
So do you mean that my Mom was right in feeling disturbed by it? It really creeped her out!