The truth about tongues: a DIVISIVE force in Christianity today

[Blain]

Honestly I don't understand why out of all the gifts tongues is the most sought after and also the most faked, I mean I get suspicious if someone starts babbling baby language or random repatetive uetterings that like the op said can easily be faked or mimicked. The gift is not one that you choose to have to it is given to who he sees fit to give to and I think a lot of it has to do with the intentions and purpose of tongues.

There is power in words and noe more so than in the actual gift of tongues but this power is not one to be sought after it is given to us but what makes a person worthy to recieve this gift? I think that a person ( and this is just my opinion so take it with a grain of salt) Who seeks after love above all other things and in doing so has a heart for others would be worthy of recieving the gift. Such a person would use the gift for the reason and purpose it was intented to edify encourage and build up and correct, I have seen far to many fake tongues out there that happen out of nowhere for no reason and never once in these fake sessions of babbling have I seen it help the church who it was done in front of in fact no one even noticed or paid attention to the babbling.

Some even believe they have the gift without even understand it and what it is for how it is used and where the gift comes from, you cannot simply assume you have the gift especially if whenever you do speak this tongues there is no power in it and is forced. The gift sort of bursts out of you like suddenly a break in the dam of water causes a flood you have no control over it you just speak it it will burst forth.

This is difference in speaking according to our will and his, we don't choose when the gift is used he does and we don't choose the words to speak he does.

 

[Nehemiah6]

your fallacy regarding your opinion that if tongues today were the same as 2000 years ago, there would be no division, is drawing a conclusion that attempts to persuade by a false dilemma and one of your own making at that.

If modern tongues were the same as the spiritual gift described in the NT, no one could rightly object. But modern tongues are NOT biblical tongues, and to claim that those who babble are "Spirit-filled", while those who do not are not "Spirit-filled" is definitely a serious cause of unnecessary division.

BTW, I am not presenting mere "opinions" as you continue to falsely assert. The facts of the matter are there for all to see. You claimed that tongues continued after the first century. I showed you from the Early Church Fathers that they did not. That is historical evidence.

 

[Truth7t7]

so it must also follow that if Jesus really died for all, then all must be saved

and of course we know there was never any sort of division in the early Christian gatherings

and we also know that when Paul said do NOT forbid speaking in tongues, he really meant do not speak in tongues

Nehemiah you present so many strawman arguements and illogical statements, that it would be funny if you were not serious

your fallacy regarding your opinion that if tongues today were the same as 2000 years ago, there would be no division, is drawing a conclusion that attempts to persuade by a false dilemma and one of your own making at that.

I agree 100%, straight, and to the point!

 

[lenna]

If modern tongues were the same as the spiritual gift described in the NT, no one could rightly object. But modern tongues are NOT biblical tongues, and to claim that those who babble are "Spirit-filled", while those who do not are not "Spirit-filled" is definitely a serious cause of unnecessary division.

BTW, I am not presenting mere "opinions" as you continue to falsely assert. The facts of the matter are there for all to see. You claimed that tongues continued after the first century. I showed you from the Early Church Fathers that they did not. That is historical evidence.

Well you were not able to flatten out the other thread on tongues and have the last word so you started this thread

Nehemiah, your opinion is contrary to scripture and your comments are the typical comments of those who choose not to accept tongues because they cannot see themselves 'babbling' as you put it. You would probably find other gifts more to your liking, such as teacher. I do not think anyone who chops verses out of the Bible because their minds are not in alignment with their spirit is qualified to teach the Bible.

I have not made any false assertions regarding your position. You do not believe and choose to not accept something your mind has devalued. Acts is historical evidence and you may continue to ignore that and cling to certain men who disputed the teaching of the Apostles as do you. (not all did and that has been presented) You are welcome to put those men before the gospel and before the record in Acts for your own consideration and those of us who know better, will not be waiting for you to enlighten us.

You have not given any proof of what you say from scripture and you cannot possibly think to discourage anyone who has actually been given this gift, and found it to be quite useful and thank God for it; so you are basically left with the impossible task of lifting a weight you cannot carry and that God Himself wishes you would put down.

I won't continue this exchange with you as one of us was once where you now are and has been awakened by God and the other is stuck and unless God intervenes, will most likely stay right there.

 

[Washed]

Modern tongues have caused a huge division within evangelical Christianity, and division is not from God. It has also resulted in “two-tier” Christianity – those who are presumably “Spirit-filled” (the tongue-speakers) being Tier One, and everyone else (who should go to the back of the bus, since they are not “Spirit-filled”) within Tier Two.

The truth of the matter is that modern tongues are not even biblical tongues. And the only reason the KJV translators used the word “tongues” is because back in the 17th century, that word was interchangeable with “languages”. So if we eliminate “unknown” (since that is not in the Greek text, therefore italicized) and simply say “language” or “languages”, the whole controversy disappears. Indeed, several modern translations do not even use the word “tongues”, and consistently translate glossa or glossais as language or languages.

There is no glossolalia in the New Testament, and that is what is practiced today.
‘Those are the terms we have heard frequently at Charismatic conferences, such as those in New Orleans in 1987, Indianapolis in 1990, and St. Louis in 2000. The tongues that I heard in these conferences were not languages of any sort but merely repetitious mumblings that anyone could imitate. Larry Lea’s “tongues” at Indianapolis in 1990 went like this: “Bubblyida bubblyida hallelujah bubblyida hallabubbly shallabubblyida kolabubblyida glooooory hallelujah bubblyida.” I wrote that down as he was saying it and later checked it against the tape. Nancy Kellar, a Roman Catholic nun who was on the executive committee of the St. Louis meeting in 2000, spoke in “tongues” on Thursday evening of the conference. Her tongues were a repetition of “shananaa leea, shananaa higha, shananaa nanaa, shananaa leea…” ‘
https://www.wayoflife.org/database/pentecostaltongues.html

But no one is speaking unlearned foreign languages supernaturally today (as even the Charismatics will tell you). It would be fantastic for missionaries from the USA to go to Japan (for example) and simply start speaking Japanese fluently and supernaturally. Instead they must spend months and years learning the language, and being only rudimentary speakers after all that.

However, when you study Acts chapter 2, there are at least fifteen foreign languages or dialects listed, and that is when tongues were manifested on the day of Pentecost. Simple Galileans (who spoke only Aramaic) were suddenly speaking Persian or Arabic as though they were native speakers! And the native speakers heard their words and understood everything perfectly.

When we come to 1 Corinthians 14, it should be evident that it is there for the correction of the Christians at Corinth. They were abusing tongues, so Paul had to straighten them out. What does Paul say? “There is no reason to believe that the gift of tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is any different from that mentioned in the book of Acts. In both places the tongues involved speaking in earthly languages that one had never learned.” [Ibid]

1. Focus on prophecy, not on tongues, but make agape love your primary goal. (vv 1-6)

2. Speaking within the church should be spiritually meaningful (vv 7-12)

3. There must be interpretation whenever tongues are spoken (vv 13-17)

4. Paul would rather speak 5 intelligible words than 10,000 words in tongues (vv 18-19)

5. Focusing on tongues is childish, and if everyone spoke in tongues at the same time, visitors would think they are all mad (vv 20-23)

6. Prophecy is extremely profitable for many reasons (vv 24-26)

7. Tongues (with interpreters) are limited to two or three speakers at the most (vv 27-28)

8. Prophecies are also limited to two or three speakers (vv 29-33)

9. Women are to maintain silence within the churches (vv 34-38)

10. Closing comments – everything to be done decently and in order (vv 39-40)

Despite the sincerity of the poster, this post is not the truth about tongues.

 

[Washed]

This was my experience as well. I was newly saved and though I tried I could never join in without an uneasy feeling. Now, all these years later I just feel sorry for the Lord that His People, some of them very nice people, damage His testimony in such a fashion.

While it is unfortunate that some groups misuse tongues, what about the people who damage the Lord’s testimony by declaring that tongues are not for today, that they died out with the apostles?

 

[lenna]

I agree 100%, straight, and to the point!

Some of it is really just common sense, isn't it? Using flawed and illogical contrived 'false dilemmas' meaning either/or, a person hopes to polarize those who are listening or reading.

 

[Blain]

Well you were not able to flatten out the other thread on tongues and have the last word so you started this thread

Nehemiah, your opinion is contrary to scripture and your comments are the typical comments of those who choose not to accept tongues because they cannot see themselves 'babbling' as you put it. You would probably find other gifts more to your liking, such as teacher. I do not think anyone who chops verses out of the Bible because their minds are not in alignment with their spirit is qualified to teach the Bible.

I have not made any false assertions regarding your position. You do not believe and choose to not accept something your mind has devalued. Acts is historical evidence and you may continue to ignore that and cling to certain men who disputed the teaching of the Apostles as do you. (not all did and that has been presented) You are welcome to put those men before the gospel and before the record in Acts for your own consideration and those of us who know better, will not be waiting for you to enlighten us.

You have not given any proof of what you say from scripture and you cannot possibly think to discourage anyone who has actually been given this gift, and found it to be quite useful and thank God for it; so you are basically left with the impossible task of lifting a weight you cannot carry and that God Himself wishes you would put down.

I won't continue this exchange with you as one of us was once where you now are and has been awakened by God and the other is stuck and unless God intervenes, will most likely stay right there.

Wow you handled that quite amazingly and with great precision If there was an opening for a teacher here in cc I would give the thumbs up for you I mean wow I'm impressed

 

[lenna]

With regard to so called 'early church fathers', it is not correct to state there is no record of any of them speaking in unknown languages.


A.D. 100 - Eusebius (Church Historian):
Writing to the preaching evangelists who were yet living, Eusebius says: "Of those that flourished in these times, Quadratus is said to have been distinguished for his prophetical gifts. There were many others, also, noted in these times who held rank in the apostolic succession... the Holy Spirit also wrought many wonders as yet through them, so that as the Gospel was heard, men in crowds voluntarily and eagerly embraced the true faith with their whole minds."

A.D. 115-202 - Irenaeus:
Irenaeus was a pupil of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John. He wrote in his book "Against Heresies", Book V, vi.: "In like manner do we also hear many brethren in the church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light, for the general benefit, the hidden things of men and declare the mysteries of God, who also the apostles term spiritual."

A.D. 300 - The Early Martyrs:
The early martyrs enjoyed these gifts. Dean Ferrar, in his book "Darkness to Dawn" states: "Even for the minutest allusions and particulars I have contemporary authority." He refers to the persecuted Christians in Rome singing and speaking in unknown tongues.

A.D. 390 - Chrysostom of Constantinople:
Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, writes: "Whoever was baptised in apostolic days, he straightway spoke with tongues, for since on their coming over from idols, without any clear knowledge or training in the Scriptures, they at once received the Spirit, not that they saw the Spirit, for He is invisible, but God's grace bestowed some sensible proof of His energy, and one straightway spoke in the Persian language, another in the Roman, another in the Indian, another in some other tongues, and this made manifest to them that were without that it was the Spirit in the very person speaking. Wherefore the apostle calls it the manifestation of the Spirit which is given to every man to profit withal."

A.D. 400 - Augustine of Hippo:
Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, one of the four great fathers of the Latin Church and considered the greatest of them all: "We still do what the apostles did when they laid hands on the Samaritans and called down the Holy Spirit on them in the laying-on of hands. It is expected that converts should speak with new tongues."

 

[lenna]

Wow you handled that quite amazingly and with great precision If there was an opening for a teacher here in cc I would give the thumbs up for you I mean wow I'm impressed

Teachers have a greater weight and are more culpable than those who do not claim to be such. But thanks anyway.

Read the post about the early church fathers and check out the link. Very informative and presents good teaching IMO. I'm actually going to read more on this site.

 

[Blain]

Teachers have a greater weight and are more culpable than those who do not claim to be such. But thanks anyway.

Read the post about the early church fathers and check out the link. Very informative and presents good teaching IMO. I'm actually going to read more on this site.

Yeah it was a great read and I might check that site out as well. As far as not being teacher goes it is a little late for that XD I learned quite a lot just from your rebuke to Nehemiah. Those with the gift for it do so even without meaning to and you clearly also have the heart of a student which is a vital thing for any teacher because if one teaches but cannot learn from others even their students they are not fit to teach. Not to mention the way you so cleanly organized and spoke your words is yet another indiaction.

I think if you just keep doing what you are doing on cc those with the ears to hear and recieve will be greatly impacted, just wait and see God clearly has great intentions for you.

 

[lenna]

Yeah it was a great read and I might check that site out as well. As far as not being teacher goes it is a little late for that XD I learned quite a lot just from your rebuke to Nehemiah. Those with the gift for it do so even without meaning to and you clearly also have the heart of a student which is a vital thing for any teacher because if one teaches but cannot learn from others even their students they are not fit to teach. Not to mention the way you so cleanly organized and spoke your words is yet another indiaction.

I think if you just keep doing what you are doing on cc those with the ears to hear and recieve will be greatly impacted, just wait and see God clearly has great intentions for you.

LOL! well ok then. We'll see. I agree with what you say regarding being a student. Good insight on that one. I just noticed they have links to David Wilkerson's site and you might like to listen in on that abit. here Although Mr Wilkerson is no longer alive on planet earth, he has pertinent things to say to us still. He really challenged people back in the day.

 

[Corban]

Verse 8, I would argue, is just affirmation that everyone heard the apostles speak the language of “hearth and home” – the language they were ‘born into’. For Jewish communities in the Eastern Diaspora, this language was Aramaic; not whatever the local language was. “In our own language”; i.e., not Hebrew, but our mother tongue (Aramaic and, if you were from the Western Diaspora, Greek). The verse says nothing about the language of the particular county where they were born, rather “the language wherein we were born” (i.e. the language of ‘hearth and home’; our native language). The 17th century English wording is a bit confusing there if you’re using the KJV.

Verse 11 confirms that – our languages (i.e. Aramaic & Greek); 'not Hebrew' (and I guess one could argue, for Jews in the Eastern Diaspora, 'nor the local vernacular').

Yes, I agree – the canton of Graubünden (Grisson/Grezione/Grischun) in Switzerland is home to Rumantsch (more properly, Rhaeto-Romance), but even in that tiny canton, Rhaeto-Romance is a more or less generic term for what is actually no fewer than 5 very distinct minor Romance languages. Different from each other to the point where communication can become an issue.

In the 1st century Western Diaspora, language wasn’t an issue – Jews quickly adopted the Koiné ‘dialect’, and their Greek was more or less the same no matter where in the Western Diaspora they were from. As I mentioned, for Jews in the eastern Diaspora, the situation was very different. No Hellenization – each county had its own language(s); however, Jewish communities lived in larger cities in very close-knit communities (much the same way as some immigrant groups today do in the US). They preserved Aramaic as part of their cultural and religious identity.

As a sort of analogy, my mother is of French-Canadian descent. She speaks English as well as anyone, but it’s not her language of “hearth and home”; the language ‘wherein she was born‘ is French. Even though she speaks the local vernacular fluently (i.e. English), it was never the language at home and with family; that’s exclusively French.

Same with Jews in the Eastern Diaspora – they may have certainly been fluent in the local language, but it was never the language 'wherein they were born' (the language they were born into). That language was Aramaic.

Thanks for your reply. I guess it boils down to how we understand "own country and own language". We'll just have to differ, but the interested reader has something to chew on. God bless.

 

[Blain]

LOL! well ok then. We'll see. I agree with what you say regarding being a student. Good insight on that one. I just noticed they have links to David Wilkerson's site and you might like to listen in on that abit. here Although Mr Wilkerson is no longer alive on planet earth, he has pertinent things to say to us still. He really challenged people back in the day.

I am glad you showed me that, I went to it and read the first thing I saw, it spoke of Isiah and the prophecy of the coming disaster it seemed to fit what seems to be unfolding today but then there was a part of how it would affect his revived church and these words spoke to me a quickening and awakening wake up call This spoke to me because those are the two words I have expressed to expl,ain what happened to me about three weeks ago.

It is the only way I explain what happened to me something inside me just awoke like my spirit stirred or quickened and he has been leading me on a path I have never traveled with him ever since. I even expressed on here how this virus is a wake up call

 

[Corban]

While it is unfortunate that some groups misuse tongues, what about the people who damage the Lord’s testimony by declaring that tongues are not for today, that they died out with the apostles?

You have a point. I see the fraud of simulating tongues as planned, and the misunderstanding of tongues not being for today and having died out with the Apostles as just lack of good teaching. But each sees it from their view. In my first four years after being born again at age 27, I was among the Pentecostals. As I said, I met lovely Christians. But do you know how many times hands were laid on me, sometimes with violence, with the admonition to "just say something and a tongue will come". Later, some leading ones even called my conversion into question because I would not "force" a tongue. After four years of this I was spiritually "battered" and disillusioned. But just when the lamp was about to go out, the Lord, ever gracious, allowed me to discover a Church meeting in a renovated carpenter's workshop in the backstreets of nearby city - a Church with no name, but which made Christ and His Word number one. I was allowed to sit under healthy teaching for eleven years before I was invited to speak. In that time, nobody forced anything, and I was allowed to openly question anything.

Looking back all these years later, I'm thankful for the experience of those first four years. I have no hard feelings and am still in contact with some of the dear saints I met among the Pentecostals. I have experienced firsthand how it is NOT done and I'm glad that I refused to simulate anything. I believe in tongues as much as the next, just as I believe in the gifts of teaching and prophecy. But you get what the Lord gives and it will automatically fall into place. A dog barks because he is a dog, and a man teaches, prophesies and/or speaks a foreign tongue because he is given it. You can "desire" it, but the Giver is God. You don't get to choose, and simulating being a pastor or teacher is about as fruitless and simulating tongues.

 

[Funkus]

Christians i know - speaking in tongues is a 'requirement'. they always ask if you do because real Christians do
I tell them i do in private prayer only not in public and that seems to satisfy them. i make it obvious i don't think its essential in other ways...
the tongues speaking i heard hasn't impressed me much. i bet its a rare gift or one that takes years to achieve

 

[Scribe]

Modern tongues have caused a huge division within evangelical Christianity, and division is not from God. It has also resulted in “two-tier” Christianity – those who are presumably “Spirit-filled” (the tongue-speakers) being Tier One, and everyone else (who should go to the back of the bus, since they are not “Spirit-filled”) within Tier Two.

The truth of the matter is that modern tongues are not even biblical tongues. And the only reason the KJV translators used the word “tongues” is because back in the 17th century, that word was interchangeable with “languages”. So if we eliminate “unknown” (since that is not in the Greek text, therefore italicized) and simply say “language” or “languages”, the whole controversy disappears. Indeed, several modern translations do not even use the word “tongues”, and consistently translate glossa or glossais as language or languages.

There is no glossolalia in the New Testament, and that is what is practiced today.
‘Those are the terms we have heard frequently at Charismatic conferences, such as those in New Orleans in 1987, Indianapolis in 1990, and St. Louis in 2000. The tongues that I heard in these conferences were not languages of any sort but merely repetitious mumblings that anyone could imitate. Larry Lea’s “tongues” at Indianapolis in 1990 went like this: “Bubblyida bubblyida hallelujah bubblyida hallabubbly shallabubblyida kolabubblyida glooooory hallelujah bubblyida.” I wrote that down as he was saying it and later checked it against the tape. Nancy Kellar, a Roman Catholic nun who was on the executive committee of the St. Louis meeting in 2000, spoke in “tongues” on Thursday evening of the conference. Her tongues were a repetition of “shananaa leea, shananaa higha, shananaa nanaa, shananaa leea…” ‘
https://www.wayoflife.org/database/pentecostaltongues.html

But no one is speaking unlearned foreign languages supernaturally today (as even the Charismatics will tell you). It would be fantastic for missionaries from the USA to go to Japan (for example) and simply start speaking Japanese fluently and supernaturally. Instead they must spend months and years learning the language, and being only rudimentary speakers after all that.

However, when you study Acts chapter 2, there are at least fifteen foreign languages or dialects listed, and that is when tongues were manifested on the day of Pentecost. Simple Galileans (who spoke only Aramaic) were suddenly speaking Persian or Arabic as though they were native speakers! And the native speakers heard their words and understood everything perfectly.

When we come to 1 Corinthians 14, it should be evident that it is there for the correction of the Christians at Corinth. They were abusing tongues, so Paul had to straighten them out. What does Paul say? “There is no reason to believe that the gift of tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is any different from that mentioned in the book of Acts. In both places the tongues involved speaking in earthly languages that one had never learned.” [Ibid]

1. Focus on prophecy, not on tongues, but make agape love your primary goal. (vv 1-6)

2. Speaking within the church should be spiritually meaningful (vv 7-12)

3. There must be interpretation whenever tongues are spoken (vv 13-17)

4. Paul would rather speak 5 intelligible words than 10,000 words in tongues (vv 18-19)

5. Focusing on tongues is childish, and if everyone spoke in tongues at the same time, visitors would think they are all mad (vv 20-23)

6. Prophecy is extremely profitable for many reasons (vv 24-26)

7. Tongues (with interpreters) are limited to two or three speakers at the most (vv 27-28)

8. Prophecies are also limited to two or three speakers (vv 29-33)

9. Women are to maintain silence within the churches (vv 34-38)

10. Closing comments – everything to be done decently and in order (vv 39-40)

I think I have addressed all of these items at least twice in my posts over the past week.

* Others mocked them thinking they were drunk because to them they were just babbling.
* I have already addressed 1 Cor 14:14 to demonstrate that Paul never knew what language he spoke when he prayed in tongues after 20 years his understanding was still unfruitful.
Paul said he would pray and sing in tongues because his spirit prayed even though his understanding was unfruitful.
* No one preached the gospel in tongues. They were heard declaring the wonderful works of God and the Peter preached the Gospel in the common language. (There is nothing in the scriptures that support that they used these tongues to preach the gospel as missionaries.) That interpretation must be discarded and then the CONTROVERSY will disappear. (ish)
* Women did speak in tongues on the day of Pentecost and they did speak in tongues and prophesy in the church (they were told to be silent in the church in relation to asking questions out of order. and ask their questions at home)

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

* Closing comments Let us move on to prophesy as it is discussed in 1 Cor 14. What does that look like. The Holy Spirit Gift of Prophecy that we should covet while at the same time not forbidding people to speak in tongues?

I have heard many say that we should be seeking the gift of prophecy only as an argument about how it is more important than tongues but then they do not seek the gift of prophecy. Why not? Don't we want to do what Paul said we should do?

 

[Washed]

You have a point. I see the fraud of simulating tongues as planned, and the misunderstanding of tongues not being for today and having died out with the Apostles as just lack of good teaching. But each sees it from their view. In my first four years after being born again at age 27, I was among the Pentecostals. As I said, I met lovely Christians. But do you know how many times hands were laid on me, sometimes with violence, with the admonition to "just say something and a tongue will come". Later, some leading ones even called my conversion into question because I would not "force" a tongue. After four years of this I was spiritually "battered" and disillusioned. But just when the lamp was about to go out, the Lord, ever gracious, allowed me to discover a Church meeting in a renovated carpenter's workshop in the backstreets of nearby city - a Church with no name, but which made Christ and His Word number one. I was allowed to sit under healthy teaching for eleven years before I was invited to speak. In that time, nobody forced anything, and I was allowed to openly question anything.

Looking back all these years later, I'm thankful for the experience of those first four years. I have no hard feelings and am still in contact with some of the dear saints I met among the Pentecostals. I have experienced firsthand how it is NOT done and I'm glad that I refused to simulate anything. I believe in tongues as much as the next, just as I believe in the gifts of teaching and prophecy. But you get what the Lord gives and it will automatically fall into place. A dog barks because he is a dog, and a man teaches, prophesies and/or speaks a foreign tongue because he is given it. You can "desire" it, but the Giver is God.

Not necessarily. Frequently people need to be taught (Acts 8:31). Also, look at the record in Acts 19. They had never heard of the holy spirit. Also, the manifestation of the spirit is given to every person (1 Cor 12:7), and God would like every Christian to speak in tongues (1 Cor 14:5). (This assumes, of course, that you believe what Paul wrote in his epistles is God-breathed). Every Christian has the ability to speak in tongues, whether he knows it or not. Whether he does it or not depends on what he knows and believes.

You don't get to choose, and simulating being a pastor or teacher is about as fruitless and simulating tongues.

Where is there a record in the Bible of anyone "simulating" tongues?

 

[Nehemiah6]

The Holy Spirit Gift of Prophecy that we should covet while at the same time not forbidding people to speak in tongues?

As I already said. That was then. This is now. Paul was speaking bout genuine supernaturally spoken languages, not modern tongues.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Despite the sincerity of the poster, this post is not the truth about tongues.

Really. Do tell.