At last, possibly a sensible discussion of tongues? I'm encouraged.
Yes, I would agree that it is entirely possible that the disciples thought they were simply speaking their own normal language.... IF it were not for all the other verses where Peter and many other disciples seem to be quite aware that the different speakers they hear (Cornelius, Corinth, etc.) are not doing this. It seems obvious to them that a language is being used that they don't understand, and somehow requires an interpreter.
I see what you mean in Corinthians. They were speaking a clear language. I still don't think it was gibberish however. I think they were speaking human languages. My thoughts are that the translators who composed the KJV did us in the modern era a disservice by using "tongues" rather than languages in their interpretation, however unexpected the confusion wrought by it was to them. In the kings English, tongues meant simply languages. Feel free to correct me on that if I'm wrong.
For the sake of civility however, I will submit that they could have been speaking some sort of gibberish that was understood by the hearer. Still, the text shows plainly in Acts 2 that the language was understood and that those who understood it were hearing the wonderful works of God. I would pose the question, however, if God can make them speak gibberish and everyone understand it, why not just let the speakers use their own native language and the hearer understand in their own native language? Why the gibberish? What purpose did that even serve?
And, yes again. I definitely believe that it was the Holy Spirit who made it possible for the "hearers" to understand. I do not think that what was being spoken was any one of the 15 different human languages heard. IMHO the "hearers" could have interpreted a cow mooing in their own language if the Spirit so desired.
I agree with you here about it could have been a cow mooing. The questions from above are still relevant here though. What purpose would there have been for making the speakers original language anything other than their original language? If the original language was changed to anything, why not the native languages of those hearing?
I think there is a mystery here involving this miracle; one that can't be harmonized or reconciled with modern day "tongues".
Another "yes". I think a large majority of what we hear today is practiced sounds picked up from other Glossolalia they have heard spoken... and that may have also been "learned" from listenening to other speakers years ago. I don't think they are being deliberately deceptive, but that they are uttering what they have convinced themselves is an Angelic Language.
I'm so glad we can agree on this.
I KNOW many people are coached and taught because I wanted very much to speak in tongues, and was shuffled into a room at a conference where that very thing was being done... the "teaching" of sounds. I didn't just get pissed after watching this crap for about ten minutes, rather, I was mad enough to want to knock heads. I stormed out of there, cussing these phonies under my breath, and went out to the parking lot and sat in my car in the dark, crying my eyes out, angry at them and at God. I was asking WHY did this have to turn out to be a bunch of BS? After about a half hour, alone out there, I started to apologize to God, and Lo and Behold, I was apologizing in a language that sounded like a cross between German and American Indian.... neither of which I knew how to speak at the time. I still have that ability to this day, though I only pray by myself like that.
I'm sorry to hear about your bad experience. I think though that this gives you an idea of how some of us feel toward people doing the same or similar. We are pretty mad about it. That's why we continue to contend for the faith and expose them and why we are so relentless about it. We don't want to see people being hurt or steered toward hell by a wolf in disguise.
I am happy to see that you practice tongues alone though as instructed by scripture and not making a public display of it.
Unlike a lot of people here I refuse to speak to anything more than how something "looks" to me. I think Hinn and his wife are psychotic to a degree, but that is merely my opinion, and I would never say that God is not somehow using them (and others) even if it is only as a bad example... because I don't know, I just want to believe I am wise enough to know.
I agree with you here as well. Everything works together for the good of those who love God and ultimately for his glory. It always reminds me of Joseph being sold into slavery by his brothers. He later tells them, "What you intended for evil, God intended for good." But we have to balance scripture. Simply because God uses all things to his ultimate goal, doesn't mean we neglect scripture that plainly tells us to expose people like Hinn. We don't hate him, or his wife, or anyone else. Believe it or not, I have prayed for him and others like him and their congregations. We don't want to see them damned, but when they have made careers out of duping people and twisting scripture beyond recognition, we have to step in and protect the weaker among us from them by exposing them. I fell prey to people like them for a good while in my life, so at this point I feel some sort of obligation to the weaker among us just as there were those who stepped in and helped me.
The rolling around and barking and stuff? Again I can't say. I wasn't there. I HAVE, however been at Lakeland during one of the "Holy Laughter" things going on. And I can confidently tell you that at least about several of the people I know personally, it was not faked. Most of these men would NEVER be caught dead making a fool of themselves. One of them is especially conscious of his poise and demeanor at all times. Yet, they were all laughing. My wife and I weren't, but we sensed nothing sinister.
Now, many of you immediately claim this is Satanic. I don't dare to do this. Besides the fact that is I don't think it is. I firmly believe in what Gamaliel warned in Acts 5: 38 and 39. In our self-righteous arrogance, to condemn what we don't understand or feel uncomfortable with, "we might just find ourselves fighting against the very God of Heaven." I have been in the Vineyard Church far too long, and seen way too much to ever say God does not work in some mysterious ways... in any way He wants. He had Isaiah run around butt-naked for three years.
I get why you wouldn't call it satanic one way or another. We all have our reservations about this. Speaking for myself, I don't take exposing people lightly or calling something demonic lightly. For the sake of brevity, let's say that these "manifestations" were completely absent from their services and never happened. What then? We look to their theology and their understanding of God, their doctrine and what they teach. These men and women have maligned the God of scripture and mocked Christ in their ignorance. This is empirically true on the basis of instruction and warnings from scripture, as well as the image of Christ, God, and the Holy Spirit as revealed in scripture.
Order? Have you ever been overseas in one of those countries? We wouldn't call half of what normally goes on in the average market place or at a Jewish festival... "orderly or in a decent, churchy manner."
I can understand some excitement in worship (clapping hands, jumping, even dancing), but the line has to be drawn somewhere. When someone has debased themselves to the point of crawling on all fours and making animals noises and calling it the Holy Spirit, we have reached a point of MAJOR heresy on the brink of all out blasphemy.
Luke I'm yo fatha lol...