TONGUES TODAY
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
-
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.
Both. Some are legit vs. others are more theater than Spirit. I personally have not experienced tongues but I do believe scripture tells us they are still in action today. But my main test is this.
1 Corinthians 14
26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.
39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
In my interpretation there must be a interpreter and it must be done in a fitting and orderly way.
1 Corinthians 14
26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.
39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
In my interpretation there must be a interpreter and it must be done in a fitting and orderly way.
-
5
-
2
-
1
- Show all
As someone mentioned - here we go again.
In answer to the question, I guess it depends on who you ask - here's a Linguist's take.....
There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" – when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) – it’s their native language (in some cases, it is a language the speaker has learned).
In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with.
It is, in part, typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, alliteration, assonance, and over-simplification of syllable structure. It is also interesting to note that any disallowed sound combinations, i.e. consonant clusters, in the speaker’s native language are also disallowed in his/her tongues-speech. Further, this subset of phonemes typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically.
There is absolutely nothing that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot easily be explained in linguistic terms.
Conversely, when it comes to something spoken, there are absolutely no Biblical references to “tongues” that do not refer to, and cannot be explained in light of, real rational language(s), though it may not be the explanation you want to hear, and it may be one which is radically different from what you believe, or were taught.
“Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
The word “tongue(s)” itself is simply a more archaic word for (real) “language(s)”, nothing more. Replace “tongue(s)” with “language(s)” in these various passages and the whole modern Pentecostal/Charismatic concept of “tongues” begins to become difficult to posit – “language(s)” sounds a lot less mysterious, and in many cases, adds more clarity to the text. Again, in Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the word has come to be equated with the modern concept of “tongues-speech”.
Most people who use ‘tongues’ are very keen on describing the ‘experience’. Indeed, for those that use it, it is very psychologically, physically, and spiritually fulfilling. It’s almost like primal screaming. When people practice ‘tongues’, they feel a sense of sweet release and inner peace, in that virtually all stress can be gone after the experience.
People describe the experience, but in examining the “mechanics” behind it…well, not so much. When a person has experienced tongues, s/he is absolutely convinced as to the ‘scripturalness’ of his/her experience, and the correctness of his/her doctrinal beliefs – this, despite the overwhelming scriptural absence of anything remotely akin to what they’re doing.
I'm not doubting or questioning the 'experience'; as mentioned, glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. Both the spiritual and physical benefits of using this tool are also well documented. Again though, it is important to note that this same statement can be made for virtually _any other culture that practices glossolalia_ . Religious and cultural differences aside, the glossolalia an Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it and where it comes from.
“Tongues” is to some Christian believers a very real and spiritually meaningful experience but consisting of emotional release via non-linguistic ‘free vocalizations’ at best; non-cognitive non language utterance – the subconscious playing with sounds to create what is perceived and interpreted as actual, meaningful speech. In some cases, I would argue that it is clearly a self/mass delusion prompted by such a strong desire to “experience God” that one creates that experience via “tongues”.
Known by many different names, “tongues”, “glossolalia”, or more accurately “non-cognitive non-language utterance” (NC-NLU), is practiced by many cultures and religious beliefs from literally all over the world; it is relatively new to Christianity and certainly not unique to it.
As a point of note, I’m a Linguist, and let me also add here that I am neither a so-called ‘cessationist’ nor a ‘continuationist’ – I do not identify with either term; in fact, I had never heard the two terms until just late in 2016. As far as I’m concerned, quite frankly, since the Biblical reference of “tongues” is to real, rational languages, obviously “tongues” haven’t “ceased”; people still speak.
In answer to the question, I guess it depends on who you ask - here's a Linguist's take.....
There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" – when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) – it’s their native language (in some cases, it is a language the speaker has learned).
In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with.
It is, in part, typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, alliteration, assonance, and over-simplification of syllable structure. It is also interesting to note that any disallowed sound combinations, i.e. consonant clusters, in the speaker’s native language are also disallowed in his/her tongues-speech. Further, this subset of phonemes typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically.
There is absolutely nothing that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot easily be explained in linguistic terms.
Conversely, when it comes to something spoken, there are absolutely no Biblical references to “tongues” that do not refer to, and cannot be explained in light of, real rational language(s), though it may not be the explanation you want to hear, and it may be one which is radically different from what you believe, or were taught.
“Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
The word “tongue(s)” itself is simply a more archaic word for (real) “language(s)”, nothing more. Replace “tongue(s)” with “language(s)” in these various passages and the whole modern Pentecostal/Charismatic concept of “tongues” begins to become difficult to posit – “language(s)” sounds a lot less mysterious, and in many cases, adds more clarity to the text. Again, in Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the word has come to be equated with the modern concept of “tongues-speech”.
Most people who use ‘tongues’ are very keen on describing the ‘experience’. Indeed, for those that use it, it is very psychologically, physically, and spiritually fulfilling. It’s almost like primal screaming. When people practice ‘tongues’, they feel a sense of sweet release and inner peace, in that virtually all stress can be gone after the experience.
People describe the experience, but in examining the “mechanics” behind it…well, not so much. When a person has experienced tongues, s/he is absolutely convinced as to the ‘scripturalness’ of his/her experience, and the correctness of his/her doctrinal beliefs – this, despite the overwhelming scriptural absence of anything remotely akin to what they’re doing.
I'm not doubting or questioning the 'experience'; as mentioned, glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. Both the spiritual and physical benefits of using this tool are also well documented. Again though, it is important to note that this same statement can be made for virtually _any other culture that practices glossolalia_ . Religious and cultural differences aside, the glossolalia an Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it and where it comes from.
“Tongues” is to some Christian believers a very real and spiritually meaningful experience but consisting of emotional release via non-linguistic ‘free vocalizations’ at best; non-cognitive non language utterance – the subconscious playing with sounds to create what is perceived and interpreted as actual, meaningful speech. In some cases, I would argue that it is clearly a self/mass delusion prompted by such a strong desire to “experience God” that one creates that experience via “tongues”.
Known by many different names, “tongues”, “glossolalia”, or more accurately “non-cognitive non-language utterance” (NC-NLU), is practiced by many cultures and religious beliefs from literally all over the world; it is relatively new to Christianity and certainly not unique to it.
As a point of note, I’m a Linguist, and let me also add here that I am neither a so-called ‘cessationist’ nor a ‘continuationist’ – I do not identify with either term; in fact, I had never heard the two terms until just late in 2016. As far as I’m concerned, quite frankly, since the Biblical reference of “tongues” is to real, rational languages, obviously “tongues” haven’t “ceased”; people still speak.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Your reply was helpful to me.
You said a couple things that made me think of something.
You said: In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with.
This is what Tolkien did when contriving a special elf language for his novels.
You said: “Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
When it comes to "praying," I don't really pray because I don't know what to say. So, I just go to the bible and pick verses out. My daily "prayer" is Psalm 119. Psalm 119 almost seems as though it is written for us to pray with. Sometimes at other times, I'll pick a different Psalm. A lot of the Psalms are prayers. Nothing that I ever "pray" comes from me though. I know Jesus told us the Lord's prayer. So, I'll use that sometimes.
I figure, God gives us all these words and tells us what we need, why not use them? I don't think he minds, or I hope he doesn't. If he has another expectation from me in terms of praying, I fail.
You said a couple things that made me think of something.
You said: In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with.
This is what Tolkien did when contriving a special elf language for his novels.
You said: “Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.
When it comes to "praying," I don't really pray because I don't know what to say. So, I just go to the bible and pick verses out. My daily "prayer" is Psalm 119. Psalm 119 almost seems as though it is written for us to pray with. Sometimes at other times, I'll pick a different Psalm. A lot of the Psalms are prayers. Nothing that I ever "pray" comes from me though. I know Jesus told us the Lord's prayer. So, I'll use that sometimes.
I figure, God gives us all these words and tells us what we need, why not use them? I don't think he minds, or I hope he doesn't. If he has another expectation from me in terms of praying, I fail.
-
2
- Show all
I did not know linguists were the new authoritative Theologians of Christianity? So a "linguist fully understands the Pneumatika, charismata and Diakonia, The Gifts of the Holy Spirit and the gifts of Christ to the church?
I did not know a secular person was to even be taken seriously about biblical truths?
I'm sure there are those like evolutionist, psychologist, and now the new Linguist who is speaking for the empowering of the Holy Spirit instead of the word of God. Human reasoning is the new biblical authority.
Sorry, Lord, prophets, apostles, evangelists, and Pastors, and teachers who are saved and filled with the Spirit You should have become a "linguist".
The above attack and falsehood I notice not one verse to refute 1cor chapter 12 through 14. Not one verse given to dismiss the gifts of Christ found in Eph chapter 4. Nothing to address Mark 16 or Matthew 28 or Luke 24.
"Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it and where it comes from."
Sounds like you are seeking devil worship to disprove the gifts of the Holy Spirit and then try to make all of them fit with those who are pentacostel. That is very much close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
Shaman in Siberia or a Vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian in Alabama? You do not know what you are talking about.
Try reading the Bible in the language you do understand instead of prompting up false doctors to attack the word of God.
You try to use worldly secular humanism to speak of spiritual things and have the audacity to say a Christian in Alabama is of the devil?
You are doing the same thing. Try proving the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not for today by the word of God. You can't You have to look outside the word of God to find support for your bias LOL.
-
3
-
1
- Show all
the human mind can not comprehend spiritual things. The natural mind will never understand the God of the Bible without the Holy Spirit who is supernatural. If a person is a linguist he understands and speaks more than one language I speak 5, and I have the gift of tongues too.
Next, I will be hearing from well-known evolutionist who has said there is no God because they have never seen Him?
Next, I will be hearing from well-known evolutionist who has said there is no God because they have never seen Him?
-
1
- Show all
That's what a lot of Psalm 119 is about.
My study method is straight forward. I start from the beginning and continue all the way to the end in the order the books are presented. That way, I pick a lot of things later on while I'm seeing all the patterns and design structure. I know many Christians that only focus on Paul. I've had them tell me that I can't understand the NT because I read it through the lens of the whole bible.
I have read through those portions and it is a topic today that is puzzling to me. The only understanding I have about "tongues" is the Pentecost when individuals heard God's words in their own tongue. Those that did not have the spirit heard only babbling and perceived drunkeness.
I do not perceive any "supernatural" tongues other than someone speaking a foreign language that not all in the church can understand without an interpreter to translate from one nation's language to theirs.
That's kind of a boring and unexciting perception. It's much more glitzy to think there are spiritual heavenly tongues that only certain gifted persons have power to understand.
My study method is straight forward. I start from the beginning and continue all the way to the end in the order the books are presented. That way, I pick a lot of things later on while I'm seeing all the patterns and design structure. I know many Christians that only focus on Paul. I've had them tell me that I can't understand the NT because I read it through the lens of the whole bible.
I have read through those portions and it is a topic today that is puzzling to me. The only understanding I have about "tongues" is the Pentecost when individuals heard God's words in their own tongue. Those that did not have the spirit heard only babbling and perceived drunkeness.
I do not perceive any "supernatural" tongues other than someone speaking a foreign language that not all in the church can understand without an interpreter to translate from one nation's language to theirs.
That's kind of a boring and unexciting perception. It's much more glitzy to think there are spiritual heavenly tongues that only certain gifted persons have power to understand.
-
1
- Show all
Sort of - there's a difference. Tolkien's languages are what are popularly called "con langs", that is, constructed languages. Unlike modern tongues-speech, con langs have a definite set pronunciation, and most importantly, a set grammar and lexicon. Tolkien based the sound of his two main Elvish languages, Quenya and Sindarin, on Finnish and Welsh, respectively.
-
2
- Show all
It's definitely not an "attack" - modern tongues-speech is what it is - non-cognitive non-language utterance. There just isn't anything you're producing that can't be explained in relatively simple linguistic terms. I'm not denying its strength/use as a spiritual tool, as I said, the "tongues experience" can be quite profound, but again, too - the same can be said for any culture that practices glossolalia.
To equate any religious/spiritual path which does not share the same beliefs as yours with somehow being "demonic" or "devil worship" is, no disrespect intended, absolutely ridiculous and religio-centric in the extreme.
To equate any religious/spiritual path which does not share the same beliefs as yours with somehow being "demonic" or "devil worship" is, no disrespect intended, absolutely ridiculous and religio-centric in the extreme.
-
2
- Show all
no, it is an attack on those who are not like-minded as you and disagree with you biblically.
a linguist is not a theologian. Nor are they experts on proper exegesis of the word of God. No Pentacostel Doctrine ever sought middle eastern or pagan information to disprove the gifts of the Holy Spirit found in the word of God.
As it has been said many times by many Pentecostals the foolishness seen on TV is not at all appropriate and unbiblical. You fail to acknowledge that truth. It is you who has sought pagan practices and trying to tie it the Gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Pentacostel would never do such a thing. The culture of the Greek word glossolalia, in context, is found in the word of God.
The term " modern tongues ' was created by those who deny the gifts of the Holy Spirit are for today. So they have moved into world explanations and secular humanism to discredit the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Very sad. mainly liberal Christianity.
a linguist is not a theologian. Nor are they experts on proper exegesis of the word of God. No Pentacostel Doctrine ever sought middle eastern or pagan information to disprove the gifts of the Holy Spirit found in the word of God.
As it has been said many times by many Pentecostals the foolishness seen on TV is not at all appropriate and unbiblical. You fail to acknowledge that truth. It is you who has sought pagan practices and trying to tie it the Gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Pentacostel would never do such a thing. The culture of the Greek word glossolalia, in context, is found in the word of God.
The term " modern tongues ' was created by those who deny the gifts of the Holy Spirit are for today. So they have moved into world explanations and secular humanism to discredit the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Very sad. mainly liberal Christianity.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Thanks for the information. I did follow your link and may I say to you that coming from the Charismatic Pentecostal denomination many years ago, and having attented classes on how to speak in tongues....the action is indeed GIBBERISH and faked to cause one to have an emotional experience.
-
1
-
1
- Show all