A Distinction Between Tongues

At the risk of sounding like a broken record......

Part 1 -

There is nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" – when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); perhaps unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) – it’s their native language.

If the history of the Pentecost movement is examined, one fact is very clear: at some point, between 1906 and 1907, the Pentecostal church was compelled to re-examine the narrative of Scripture with respect to “tongues”. The reason for this re-examination was that it quickly became embarrassingly obvious that their original supposition, and fervent belief in tongues as xenoglossy, certainly wasn’t what they were producing.

This forced a serious theological dilemma — As a whole, either the Pentecostal movement would have to admit it was wrong about “tongues”, or the modern experience needed to be completely redefined. The latter option was chosen.

One would think it impossible to study the history of Pentecostalism without, at the very least, a cursory look at the ‘tongues issue’. Because the Pentecostal doctrine and understanding on tongues was completely redefined, this would seem to present a problem – how can the issue be taught by Pentecostals to Pentecostals? The answer is rather surprising. The entire issue seems to have been conveniently ‘forgotten about’ and for all intents and purposes, swept under the rug. Very few, indeed if any, Pentecostals are taught about this issue; in my experience, most aren’t even aware that it ever existed.

In redefining “tongues”, Pentecostals looked to primary and secondary source works for an alternative explanation. It is during this time that, that (mainly) five German scholars promoted a fresh new approach to Biblical interpretation that purposely tried to avoid the trappings of traditional and enforced interpretations of Biblical texts, collectively known as “Higher Criticism”. Part of this tradition was examining “tongues” as ecstatic utterance, rather than the supposed xenoglossy as understood by mainstream Christianity for centuries.

As a quick aside, an important thing to note is that, prior to 1879, the term ‘glossolalia’ did not exist – it is a word coined by English theologian, Frederick Farrar (Dean of Canterbury) in 1879 in one of his publications.

The Pentecostal solution was an adaptation from the works of Farrar, Schaff and a few others. These ideas were further ‘tweaked’ to more adequately fit their new notion of tongues. From this, the concept of “prayer language” as an explanation for the modern phenomenon of tongues-speech was formed.

Over a short period of time, a Pentecostal apologetic was built. The emergence of the term “utterance” was strongly emphasized - it kept the definition ambiguous as it allowed for a variety of definitions beyond real, rational language, it was something sort of related to language, and could be defended more easily. “Utterance” fit much better in the Pentecostal paradigm and did not require empirical evidence. ‘Natural Praise’ and ‘adoration’ became a feature of ‘tongues’, and then ‘heavenly’ or ‘prayer language’ further broadened the definition. The term ‘glossolalia’ was transferred in from academia and was given a Pentecostal definition. In short, the tongues doctrine simply shifted into new semantics without any explanation. Xenoglossy one day, “prayer language” the next.

The resulting implicit theology however was not a synthesis of revelation and philosophy, but rather a synthesis of trying to make sense of the modern “tongues experience” in light of the narrative of Scripture. A way to legitimize and justify the modern phenomenon by ‘proofing’ it in the Bible. The problem with this however, was an obvious overwhelming absence therein of anything resembling modern tongues. Call it what you will, but for this group of Christians, the result was a virtual re-definition of scripture with respect to the understanding and justification of modern “tongues”; a re-interpretation of select Biblical texts to fit the modern practice/connotation of what ”tongues” was/is perceived to be.

What is amazing to me is how absolutely none of this is taught. It’s a topic that today is completely glossed over and conveniently forgotten about in Pentecostal/Charismatic circles.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

When evaluating the concept of speaking in tongues it is crucial to rightly divide the Word of Truth. (2 Tim 2:15)

Understanding of any concept in the Word requires the separation of scripture into proper categories. In order to know what is expected of all mankind it is absolutely essential to adhere to this practice. Otherwise, deception will keep those who earnestly wish to be obedient to God’s Word from doing so.

Twisting, combining, and force fitting unrelated scriptures to justify a concept is one way the enemy keeps mankind chained in darkness.

Speaking in tongues is the evidence that a person has received the entrance of the Holy Ghost into their body. Scripture specifies this in the Book of Acts where the birth of the NT church is recorded. (Acts 2:4) What occurred was prophesied by the Prophet Joel. (Acts 2:16) Peter states that receiving the Holy Ghost is a gift that is available to all those whom Jesus’ calls. (Acts 2:38)

The Apostle Peter addressed the Jewish population on the Day of Pentecost with instructions that all were required to obey.

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” Acts 2:38-39

NotWhen evaluating the concept of speaking in tongues it is crucial to rightly divide the Word of Truth. (2 Tim 2:15)icabove that the Holy Ghost WAS the promised gift available to AS MANY AS THE LORD SHALL CALL.

Later Peter’s words to the Gentiles via Cornelius include required obedience to the same components outlined in his comments to the Jewish population when the church was first birthed. They, too, receive the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues. (Acts 10:44-48)

Another group of people, the Samaritans who are half Jewish and half Gentile receive Peter’s instructions through Philip the evangelist. (Acts 8:12-17) The group hears the message of Jesus and the need to be water baptized in His name and do so. However, Philip realizes they did not receive the Holy Ghost and sends for Peter and John to assist. STOP.

Ask yourself how Philip knew the group had not received the Holy Ghost? One can only conclude from his actions, and other related scriptures on the topic, there is external evidence of the infilling. In this portion of scripture we also see it stated that when Simon saw that the Holy Ghost was given through the laying on of hands he offered money. (Acts 8:18) Again, ask yourself how Simon knew someone had received the Holy Ghost after having hands laid upon them. These scripture verses debunk the idea that everyone receives the Holy Ghost the moment they believe the gospel message of Jesus.

Lastly, the Apostle Paul comes across some disciples at Ephesus. The first question he asks is “Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?” Again his question debunks the idea that everyone gets the Holy Ghost the moment they believe the gospel.

Further, Paul instructs the disciples on what is required:

Acts 19:3-93 “And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve.

8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.

9 But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.”

Notice after Paul provided the disciples with accurate information concerning the correct way to water baptize, and of the need to receive the Holy Ghost as evidenced by speaking in tongues he stayed to teach others this truth as well. (Acts 19:8) But many believed him not and spoke evil of that way so he departed from them. (Acts 19:9)

The scripture evidence is conclusive. Everyone is supposed to receive the Holy Ghost and has done so when there is evidence of speaking in tongues. God is the only one that has complete control of the tongue.

"For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: But the tongue can no man tame;" (James 3:7-8) However, with God all things are possible. (Matt 19:26)

In addition, on the Day of Pentecost a flame resembling a cloven tongue appeared above each person when the Spirit entered their body and they began speaking in tongues.

The visual flame accompanying the initial speaking in tongues surely conveyed that the presence of God had filled the body. The born again Christian’s body is God’s tabernacle. Notice the OT parallel below:

• The Israelites knew when God was present in the darkness of night by the pillar of flame that appeared above the Old Testament tabernacle. (Exodus 25:8, 22, 29:43,40:34-38) The flame was the undeniable evidence that God’s Holy Spirit was present.

The definition of cloven pertaining to this scripture means split. This implies that biblical tongues manifests in two forms.

• The cloven (split or divided in two) tongue appears to represent that there are two types of tongues: One as the initial evidence of the infilling of the Holy Spirit, and two; the Spiritual gift of tongues.

SPIRITUAL GIFT OF TONGUES:

Paul’s discourse about Spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12) was presented to those who had already become born again believers.

Only after one is born again and has received the Holy Ghost within their body will there be the possibility of having Spiritual gifts manifest for the edifying of other church members.

The Spiritual gifts manifest when the Holy Ghost flows through and uses our human body to edify other believers and unbelievers alike. The born again Christian is a conduit between the Holy Ghost and others for the specific purpose of bringing God’s will to pass.

God distributes the Spiritual gifts as He sees fit. Not all will be used to Speak in Tongues for the edification of church members.

How dare you be literal?!

Those committed to modern tongues will remain fixed on their beliefs, so we would need to simply agree to disagree. At the same time we need to recognize Pentecostals as genuine brothers and sisters in Christ who have been saved by grace, and many are very fine Christians. But you are right about their emotionalism. Emotions are good and necessary, but emotionalism is often shallow.

There is not a single record of Christ speaking in tongues.

And?

According to Curtis Edwards, Pagan Pentecostalism: Its Roots: Sex, Sin & Slavery, Voodoo was the religion of African slaves. And even before slavery they would voodoo any religion they took part in. They had voodoo Catholicism for the main part.

The after coming to Haitian and American shores, they voodooed whatever religion they encountered. Voodoo Methodism and voodoo Baptist churches, were common in Louisiana.

This is history. Prove it wrong and then complain. Nothing personal.

You realize this smacks of racism. I knew an ethnic Indian preacher who said some people were suspicious of him for being Indian, too.

There were many slaves who genuinely believed during the Great Awakening. Black meetings were more 'lively'. Even today, a lot of Baptists and other churches like that that have black congregations tend toward that style. That doesn't mean they are into voodoo because their ancestors hailed from Africa.

Seymour was a Christian who spent five hours a day in prayer.

I've found sources that witnessed people who recognized their own languages being spoken 'in tongues' at the Azusa Street Revival.

I've found sources that witnessed people who recognized their own languages being spoken 'in tongues' at the Azusa Street Revival.

I have a pastor friend that this happened to. He was told about salvation in his own language in a church he attended. Today he has a church with nearly a thousand people attending.

Well the point is that if anyone was filled with the Holy Spirit 100% of the time, it was Christ. Yet he spoke only Aramaic (and Hebrew when necessary). The same would apply to John the Baptizer.

Nah, I read your other threads and posts. You've got yourself so confused you don't know if you're coming or going. Whatever cult you're a part of I suggest you leave before you're brainwashed further. smh

You realize this smacks of racism. I knew an ethnic Indian preacher who said some people were suspicious of him for being Indian, too.

There were many slaves who genuinely believed during the Great Awakening. Black meetings were more 'lively'. Even today, a lot of Baptists and other churches like that that have black congregations tend toward that style. That doesn't mean they are into voodoo because their ancestors hailed from Africa.

Seymour was a Christian who spent five hours a day in prayer.

I've found sources that witnessed people who recognized their own languages being spoken 'in tongues' at the Azusa Street Revival.

I wish you would join in using scripture and give your views, not just criticism or insults. I was a Pentecostal for many years and know both sides of the story.

Go though my other posts, you'll find Scripture. You're not original. You went to a church once, good for you. I was in ministry 20yrs. traveled in hundreds of churches of all denoms. and you know what? There are spirit filled Baptists, Wesleyans, Methodists, even Catholics. You attended a church that misused tongues, pity, find another church. You don't believe in tongues, could care less. You link tongues to sex,slavery and voodoo, now we have an issue. Just because some unknown moron proved his own bias means nothing. I don't what "perfect" church or denom. you attend now, but how would you like it if I said you weren't saved, you were in a sex cult and practiced witch craft, you'd think I was insane. Utterly ridiculous. I have family that are preachers. Your comments are personally offensive and utter nonsense. Voodoo. Insane.

I went to a Pentecostal church twice with some friends who are members. The pastor was having some medical issues so his wife filled in as preacher on both occasions, which were separated by a few months.
On the second visit I witnessed her start to speak strangely about half way through the sermon. She started’ah drawing’ah out her wordsss’ah seemingly trying to raise emotion I guess. before the sermon was over there were people up front kneeling and praying and my buddy took me up. They placed hands on me (and others) and I could hear them all speaking in ”tongues”. The one closest to me was almost speaking in my ear and this went in for minutes, long enough to analyze the sounds. I’m no expert but it was painfully obvious to me that he was making up his own words. Not to make fun but remember when you were a kid maybe you tried to speak Chinese but had no idea what you were doing, that’s what he was doing. It was like wang twang twong pwong, with a slow southern draw no less.
I found it a little humorous and sad, tried to pray for them amongst all the commotion. When I went home I read this:

1 Corinthians 14:27-33 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

So just to summarize my first experience hearing tongues. Approximately 6 people all speaking at once, no interpreter, all led by a woman preacher.
Holy Spirit inspired contradiction of scripture? Absolutely not.

Questions:
Would falsely speaking in tongues be considered a lie?
If so, would it be lying in the name of God?
Is that considered blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?
Can someone who is actually born again, that is to say the Holy Trinity abides in that person, speak in tongues falsely?

Approximately 6 people all speaking at once, no interpreter, all led by a woman preacher.

Would falsely speaking in tongues be considered a lie?

it was painfully obvious to me that he was making up his own words.

You can take it or leave it. All believers have the Holy Spirit. And many become filled with the Holy Spirit through repentance. But scripture does not support the Baptism of the Holy Spirit since Paul stopped healing in the Epistles. Many whom he would have healed were sick. Timothy on medicine. If the Baptism were for today, it would be like Acts. Miracles would be headline news everywhere.