That is your iterpretation.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Speaking in tongues and the Holy Spirit
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
The diversity of Tongues you claim is biblical is not taught as Doctrine, as far as I can tell. We may surmise that is what Paul is talking about, but the fact it is not taught explicitly as doctrine indicates this supposed differentiation is less important than is claimed.
My Rock
Member
Not my Interpretation it is strictly Biblical and spelled out clearly. Take away ALL added thought, if that is what you think is wrong, and use on the passages from Scripture and still get same result.
Many will argue against the following interpretations.
Acts 2:4 and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
all. The apostles and the 120. Cf. Joe_2:28-32.
filled with the Holy Spirit. In contrast to the baptism with the Spirit, which is the one-time act by which God places believers into His body (see notes on 1Co_12:13), the filling is a repeated reality of Spirit-controlled behavior that God commands believers to maintain (see notes on Eph_5:18). Peter and many others in Acts 2 were filled with the Spirit again (e.g., Act_4:8, Act_4:31; Act_6:5; Act_7:55) and so spoke boldly the Word of God. The fullness of the Spirit affects all areas of life, not just speaking boldly (cf. Eph_5:19-33).
with other tongues. Known languages (see notes on Act_2:6; 1Co_14:1-25), not ecstatic utterances. These languages given by the Spirit were a sign of judgment to unbelieving Israel (see notes on 1Co_14:21-22). They also showed that from then on God's people would come from all nations, and marked the transition from Israel to the church. Tongues-speaking occurs only twice more in Acts (Act_10:46; Act_19:6).
James Montgomery Boice - People talk about the baptism of the Holy Spirit as if that is what Pentecost was about. Usually they mean that Pentecost “baptism” is a special experience that involves the gift of being able to speak in tongues. They would say that the ability to speak in tongues is the only sure evidence that a person has been baptized with the Spirit—or even, perhaps, is a Christian. The Bible does talk about a baptism of the Holy Spirit, of course, but not in those terms. The baptism of the Holy Spirit has to do with regeneration or being born again. It results in the regenerated person being identified with Jesus Christ, spiritually in the sight of God and publicly before other men and women. Significantly, that is what the sacrament of water baptism also signifies. It does not have anything to do with imparting some kind of special blessing. It is an identification of the baptized individual with Christ. It is done once, because a person is only saved once. To be baptized by the Holy Spirit is to be a Christian. John R. W. Stott wrote correctly, “Water-baptism is the initiatory Christian rite, because Spirit-baptism is the initiatory Christian experience.” To be filled with the Holy Spirit is different, and it is this that is being talked about here. The early believers did not become Christians at Pentecost. They already were believers. They believed in Jesus. They were meeting together. They were praying. They were studying the Bible. But now the Holy Spirit came upon them in a special way to empower them for their task. The word used to describe the experience is “filled.” (Ibid)
Baptism with the Spirit is a one time occurrence, carried out by Christ, and is not repeated nor commanded. On the other hand, filling with the Spirit is to be a repeated occurrence and is commanded (See Relationship Between Spirit Baptism and Filling). The saying is "One baptism, many fillings." And so Paul commanded all believers to be daily, continually controlled by the Spirit "And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled (passive voice = speaks of force from without acting on the subject and translated "be" in the present imperative = command calling for this to be our lifestyle, daily surrendering our will and submitting to the will of and control of) the Spirit, (Ephesians 5:18-commentary).
Acts 2:4 and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
all. The apostles and the 120. Cf. Joe_2:28-32.
filled with the Holy Spirit. In contrast to the baptism with the Spirit, which is the one-time act by which God places believers into His body (see notes on 1Co_12:13), the filling is a repeated reality of Spirit-controlled behavior that God commands believers to maintain (see notes on Eph_5:18). Peter and many others in Acts 2 were filled with the Spirit again (e.g., Act_4:8, Act_4:31; Act_6:5; Act_7:55) and so spoke boldly the Word of God. The fullness of the Spirit affects all areas of life, not just speaking boldly (cf. Eph_5:19-33).
with other tongues. Known languages (see notes on Act_2:6; 1Co_14:1-25), not ecstatic utterances. These languages given by the Spirit were a sign of judgment to unbelieving Israel (see notes on 1Co_14:21-22). They also showed that from then on God's people would come from all nations, and marked the transition from Israel to the church. Tongues-speaking occurs only twice more in Acts (Act_10:46; Act_19:6).
James Montgomery Boice - People talk about the baptism of the Holy Spirit as if that is what Pentecost was about. Usually they mean that Pentecost “baptism” is a special experience that involves the gift of being able to speak in tongues. They would say that the ability to speak in tongues is the only sure evidence that a person has been baptized with the Spirit—or even, perhaps, is a Christian. The Bible does talk about a baptism of the Holy Spirit, of course, but not in those terms. The baptism of the Holy Spirit has to do with regeneration or being born again. It results in the regenerated person being identified with Jesus Christ, spiritually in the sight of God and publicly before other men and women. Significantly, that is what the sacrament of water baptism also signifies. It does not have anything to do with imparting some kind of special blessing. It is an identification of the baptized individual with Christ. It is done once, because a person is only saved once. To be baptized by the Holy Spirit is to be a Christian. John R. W. Stott wrote correctly, “Water-baptism is the initiatory Christian rite, because Spirit-baptism is the initiatory Christian experience.” To be filled with the Holy Spirit is different, and it is this that is being talked about here. The early believers did not become Christians at Pentecost. They already were believers. They believed in Jesus. They were meeting together. They were praying. They were studying the Bible. But now the Holy Spirit came upon them in a special way to empower them for their task. The word used to describe the experience is “filled.” (Ibid)
Baptism with the Spirit is a one time occurrence, carried out by Christ, and is not repeated nor commanded. On the other hand, filling with the Spirit is to be a repeated occurrence and is commanded (See Relationship Between Spirit Baptism and Filling). The saying is "One baptism, many fillings." And so Paul commanded all believers to be daily, continually controlled by the Spirit "And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled (passive voice = speaks of force from without acting on the subject and translated "be" in the present imperative = command calling for this to be our lifestyle, daily surrendering our will and submitting to the will of and control of) the Spirit, (Ephesians 5:18-commentary).
Exactly. More than that, the wording is pretty clear: receiving the Holy Spirit was based on repentance. (It is debatable as to the necessity of baptism for this particular aspect and in this context as it isn't necessary for salvation, but is a public profession of faith in Christ.) There is no mention of additional prayer or seeking the Holy Spirit and no mention of anyone else speaking in tongues.
Consecrated Life
Member
I'm curious as to what are the varying dialects of those who have been given the gift of tongues in this day and age on this continent as opposed to those on the other side of the planet 2000 years ago ?
Anyone care to share ?
Anyone care to share ?
I have questioned this many times over the years.
The only answers given to me, is that it is utterance "gibberish" that the Holy Spirit gives them.
Thank you for that question, I am interested in answers as well.
I have thought that the language that I pray in tongues is of a middle eastern origin because of two of the names I have heard and recognize when I pray as the Holy Spirit gives the utterance , Eli and Allah . Sometimes when I pray in tongues a melody will come with the words and I sing my prayer , sometimes the melody has a middle eastern tonal structure also . My prayer language never seems to change but I do hear words I have not heard previously in a prayer .
Consecrated Life
Member
Yes. it occurred to me that inherent information included in the fact that the disciples were gifted by the Holy Ghost with multiple regional dialects would be the individua direction each of them were to go when they departed Jerusalem.
Consecrated Life
Member
Interesting , do you happen to live in proximity to a population of middle eastern descent ?
The gift of "tongues" given on the day of Pentecost were foreign languages.
The personal gift of tongues given to the repentant and washed, has been called the language of angels.
An interpreter is necessary to understand that language.
I'ld be worried about hearing "Allah" while I was praying in tongues.
There is a Mosque about 30 minutes from me .
Well , since I knew the Holy Spirit was the One doing the praying I was just curious as to why the word Allah was used . So I looked to see what I could find .
Pre-Islamic Arab Christians used the word Allah for the Christian God .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
Allah has been used as a term for God by Muslims (both Arab and non-Arab), Judaeo-Arabic-speaking Jews, and Arab Christians[11] after the terms "al-ilāh" and "Allah" were used interchangeably in Classical Arabic by the majority of Arabs who had become Muslims.
Consecrated Life
Member
Seems convoluted and backwards to me, especially requiring an interpreter, as being a tool to further the purpose of God, in comparison to the original purpose.
What is the purpose ?
1Corinthians 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
tongues of men. Cf. 1Co_12:10, 1Co_12:28; 1Co_14:4-33. That this gift involved actual languages is established in Act_2:4-13 (see notes there), and affirmed in this text by Paul's calling it "of men"—clearly a reference to human language. This was the gift which the Corinthians prized so highly, abused so greatly, and counterfeited so disastrously. God gave the ability to speak in a language not known to the speaker, as a sign with limited function (see notes on 1Co_14:1-33).
tongues … of angels. The apostle was writing in general, hypothetical terms. There is no biblical teaching of any special angelic language that people could learn to speak.
love. Self-giving love that is more concerned with giving than receiving (Joh_3:16; cf. 1Co_14:1; Mat_5:44-45; Joh_13:1, Joh_13:34-35; Joh_15:9; Rom_5:10; Eph_2:4-7; Php_2:2; Col_3:14; Heb_10:24). The word was not admired and thus seldom used in ancient Greek literature, but it is common in the NT. Without love, no matter how linguistically gifted a person is to speak his own language, other languages, or even (hypothetically) the speech of angels, his speech is noise only. In NT times, rites honoring the pagan deities Cybele, Bacchus, and Dionysius included ecstatic noises accompanied by gongs, cymbals, and trumpets. Unless the speech of the Corinthians was done in love, it was no better than the gibberish of pagan ritual.
If I speak with the tongues (glossa) of men and of angels - Paul has just mentioned tongues in 1 Cor 12:30+ "All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?" His mention of tongues (and not the other spiritual gifts) would suggest that this gift was a significant issue among the saints at Corinth. Of course because it is a speaking gift ("sign gift"), it is more "showy" than some of the other gifts.
THOUGHT - Notice that this "IF" introduces a THIRD CLASS CONDITIONAL statement which might be paraphrased "If we could continually speak in tongues of men or tongues of angels (in their angelic language)." Paul is not advocating or promoting angelic languages, but simply postulating, if that "higher" supernatural language were even possible for finite natural men, it would still be worthless! That's his main point. He is not saying it is possible for men to speak angelic languages. It is not even logical. Only angels can speak angelic language. It is very easy to misinterpret what Paul is saying, but one must always be cautious in applying isolated passages simply because they sound good and make us feel good. That is taking a text out of context and making it a pretext which is always a potentially dangerous practice (A pretext is an excuse to do something or say something that is not accurate. Pretexts may be based on a half-truth or developed from taking a passage out of context to suit one's own interest or purpose.). Be a Berean (Acts 17:11+)!
Question - Is there a heavenly language? What language will we speak in heaven?
Answer: There is some conjecture as to whether there is such a thing as a “heavenly language.” Is there a language unknown on earth but spoken fluently in heaven? If so, is it possible for someone to learn to speak this esoteric language? Is it possibly a gift of the Holy Spirit?
First, we should point out that the expression “heavenly language” is nowhere found in Scripture. Also, the phrase “tongues of angels” is used only once, in 1 Corinthians 13:1, “If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.”
Some have suggested that Paul’s reference to “tongues of angels” is proof that there is a heavenly language that only angels—and certain Spirit-filled believers—can speak. Let’s take a closer look at the verse and its context.
When Paul speaks of “tongues of men,” he is most likely referring to the gift given on the Day of Pentecost when the apostles were imbued by the Holy Spirit to speak languages virtually unknown to them (Acts 2:4-12). “Tongues of men” is a reference to the various human languages in use at the time. The Corinthian brethren so prized this miraculous gift that it became severely abused and counterfeited. Paul addressed this problem in his epistle. The Corinthians needed to know that God gave the ability to speak a foreign language as a sign, and the gift had some restrictions (1 Corinthians 14:1-33).
When Paul speaks of the “tongues of angels,” he isn’t speaking literally of a “heavenly language,” as some want to believe, but is using a hyperbolic expression. Hyperbole is an exaggeration to make a point. Paul is saying that, no matter how gifted one may be, whether in his own language, in foreign languages, or even in the hypothetical speech of angels, it’s all moot without love. In fact, without love, one’s speech is no better than the useless babble of the pagan religions. The pagan culture of Corinth honored their gods in ritualistic ceremonies accompanied by loud musical instruments such as gongs, cymbals, and trumpets. Their worship was a chaotic cacophony.
Speaking in “tongues of angels” is probably best understood as having the ability to speak with “divine eloquence.” As one well-known Bible scholar put it, “Paul is simply saying that, were he to have the ability to speak with the skill and eloquence of the greatest men, even with angelic eloquence, he would only become a noisy gong . . .”
The fact is that Paul used hyperbolic language elsewhere, including in the very next verse, with his mention of faith “to remove mountains.” His exaggerations serve to emphasize the necessity of love. Showing love is more important than the grandest, most miraculous action imaginable.
To suggest that Paul implies that “tongues of angels” is a kind of “heavenly language” is to go beyond what Scripture actually teaches. It is taking the expression completely out of context in an attempt to teach something other than what Paul actually said. GotQuestions.org
tongues of men. Cf. 1Co_12:10, 1Co_12:28; 1Co_14:4-33. That this gift involved actual languages is established in Act_2:4-13 (see notes there), and affirmed in this text by Paul's calling it "of men"—clearly a reference to human language. This was the gift which the Corinthians prized so highly, abused so greatly, and counterfeited so disastrously. God gave the ability to speak in a language not known to the speaker, as a sign with limited function (see notes on 1Co_14:1-33).
tongues … of angels. The apostle was writing in general, hypothetical terms. There is no biblical teaching of any special angelic language that people could learn to speak.
love. Self-giving love that is more concerned with giving than receiving (Joh_3:16; cf. 1Co_14:1; Mat_5:44-45; Joh_13:1, Joh_13:34-35; Joh_15:9; Rom_5:10; Eph_2:4-7; Php_2:2; Col_3:14; Heb_10:24). The word was not admired and thus seldom used in ancient Greek literature, but it is common in the NT. Without love, no matter how linguistically gifted a person is to speak his own language, other languages, or even (hypothetically) the speech of angels, his speech is noise only. In NT times, rites honoring the pagan deities Cybele, Bacchus, and Dionysius included ecstatic noises accompanied by gongs, cymbals, and trumpets. Unless the speech of the Corinthians was done in love, it was no better than the gibberish of pagan ritual.
If I speak with the tongues (glossa) of men and of angels - Paul has just mentioned tongues in 1 Cor 12:30+ "All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?" His mention of tongues (and not the other spiritual gifts) would suggest that this gift was a significant issue among the saints at Corinth. Of course because it is a speaking gift ("sign gift"), it is more "showy" than some of the other gifts.
THOUGHT - Notice that this "IF" introduces a THIRD CLASS CONDITIONAL statement which might be paraphrased "If we could continually speak in tongues of men or tongues of angels (in their angelic language)." Paul is not advocating or promoting angelic languages, but simply postulating, if that "higher" supernatural language were even possible for finite natural men, it would still be worthless! That's his main point. He is not saying it is possible for men to speak angelic languages. It is not even logical. Only angels can speak angelic language. It is very easy to misinterpret what Paul is saying, but one must always be cautious in applying isolated passages simply because they sound good and make us feel good. That is taking a text out of context and making it a pretext which is always a potentially dangerous practice (A pretext is an excuse to do something or say something that is not accurate. Pretexts may be based on a half-truth or developed from taking a passage out of context to suit one's own interest or purpose.). Be a Berean (Acts 17:11+)!
Question - Is there a heavenly language? What language will we speak in heaven?
Answer: There is some conjecture as to whether there is such a thing as a “heavenly language.” Is there a language unknown on earth but spoken fluently in heaven? If so, is it possible for someone to learn to speak this esoteric language? Is it possibly a gift of the Holy Spirit?
First, we should point out that the expression “heavenly language” is nowhere found in Scripture. Also, the phrase “tongues of angels” is used only once, in 1 Corinthians 13:1, “If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.”
Some have suggested that Paul’s reference to “tongues of angels” is proof that there is a heavenly language that only angels—and certain Spirit-filled believers—can speak. Let’s take a closer look at the verse and its context.
When Paul speaks of “tongues of men,” he is most likely referring to the gift given on the Day of Pentecost when the apostles were imbued by the Holy Spirit to speak languages virtually unknown to them (Acts 2:4-12). “Tongues of men” is a reference to the various human languages in use at the time. The Corinthian brethren so prized this miraculous gift that it became severely abused and counterfeited. Paul addressed this problem in his epistle. The Corinthians needed to know that God gave the ability to speak a foreign language as a sign, and the gift had some restrictions (1 Corinthians 14:1-33).
When Paul speaks of the “tongues of angels,” he isn’t speaking literally of a “heavenly language,” as some want to believe, but is using a hyperbolic expression. Hyperbole is an exaggeration to make a point. Paul is saying that, no matter how gifted one may be, whether in his own language, in foreign languages, or even in the hypothetical speech of angels, it’s all moot without love. In fact, without love, one’s speech is no better than the useless babble of the pagan religions. The pagan culture of Corinth honored their gods in ritualistic ceremonies accompanied by loud musical instruments such as gongs, cymbals, and trumpets. Their worship was a chaotic cacophony.
Speaking in “tongues of angels” is probably best understood as having the ability to speak with “divine eloquence.” As one well-known Bible scholar put it, “Paul is simply saying that, were he to have the ability to speak with the skill and eloquence of the greatest men, even with angelic eloquence, he would only become a noisy gong . . .”
The fact is that Paul used hyperbolic language elsewhere, including in the very next verse, with his mention of faith “to remove mountains.” His exaggerations serve to emphasize the necessity of love. Showing love is more important than the grandest, most miraculous action imaginable.
To suggest that Paul implies that “tongues of angels” is a kind of “heavenly language” is to go beyond what Scripture actually teaches. It is taking the expression completely out of context in an attempt to teach something other than what Paul actually said. GotQuestions.org
Background on the issues at Corinth.
But let me give you a little background on the Corinthian situation. Remember that, for the most part, the Corinthians had allowed the entire world system in which they existed to infiltrate their assembly. For example, they were all hung up with human philosophies, the first four chapters say. They had a hero worship cult just like their society did; chapter 3 talks about that. They were involved in terrible, gross, sexual immorality; chapters 5 and 6 talks about that. They were suing each other in the court; chapter 6 talks about that. They had fouled up the home and marriage, and misevaluated that whole thing; chapter 7 talks about that.
They were all confused about pagan feasts and idolatry and things offered to idols; chapters 8, 9 and 10 talks about that. They had goofed up the proper place of women in the church; chapter 11 talks about that. They had misconstrued the whole dimension of spiritual gifts; chapter 12 talks about that. And they had lost hold of the one great thing, love; chapter 13 talks about that.
They had let the entire mass of the satanic system that existed in their society infiltrate the church. And once it all came in, in with it came pagan-style of religion, with all of the ecstasies, and all of its eroticisms, and all of its sensualities; they bought the whole bag. And so the whole thing is a confused amalgamation of truth and error. A modern parallelism would be that of Roman Catholicism, which is a combination of Christianity out of the Bible and ancient Baal worship, and the Mother and Child cult that was originally known as Ashtoreth and Tammuz. And the same thing occurred in the Corinthian church. It was Christianity in part and paganism in part, all wedded together.
Now if you study the Greco-Roman world the time of the Corinthian church, you would know that they had various priests and priestesses; and people who were devotees of the gods would go to these great temples, and they would worship these priests and priestesses. And it was very common for a devotee would go into an ecstasy. An ecstasy means to go out of yourself. That’s the literal meaning of the word, to go out of yourself. They would literally flip out, and they would go into an unconscious state, in which they would have all kinds of phenomena occur, a psychic kind of phenomena. They would believe that when they went out of themselves, they literally left the body, and they ascended into space, and they connected to deity, whatever deity they were worshiping, and they began to commune with the deity; and once they began to commune with that deity, they would begin to speak the language of the gods.
This was a very common thing in their culture. So that term used in Corinthians, glōssais lalein, to speak in tongues, was not invented by Bible writers, but was a term used commonly in the Greco-Roman culture to speak of pagan ecstasy, and going out of the body, connecting with the deity, and in a mystical way beginning to speak the language of the gods, which came out as some kind of gobbledygook and gibberish.
Now the Greeks even had a word for this ecstatic religious experience. You’ll be interested to know what the word was. It was the word eros. Remember that word? We sometimes translate it as sensual love. But the word is a bigger word than that; it has a broader meaning. The word eros simply means the desire for the sensual, or the desire for the erotic, or the desire for the ecstasy, or the desire for the ultimate experience or the feeling.
And the kind of religion they had was erotic religion. It was religion designed to be felt. It was sensual, ecstatic kind of religion. And you’ll remember, if you studied those religions, that when they went to those temples and to those priestesses they actually entered into orgies, didn’t they. And that whole idea of erotic and sexual and sensual and ecstatic and the gibberish that went on with divine utterances, all was rolled into one big ball under the mystery religions that had spawned in Babylon and had come into the Corinthian society. And I’m not going to take the time to read you all of the information on that, but there is tremendous historical information that tells us that this did occur.
https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/1871/the-truth-about-tongues-part-1
But let me give you a little background on the Corinthian situation. Remember that, for the most part, the Corinthians had allowed the entire world system in which they existed to infiltrate their assembly. For example, they were all hung up with human philosophies, the first four chapters say. They had a hero worship cult just like their society did; chapter 3 talks about that. They were involved in terrible, gross, sexual immorality; chapters 5 and 6 talks about that. They were suing each other in the court; chapter 6 talks about that. They had fouled up the home and marriage, and misevaluated that whole thing; chapter 7 talks about that.
They were all confused about pagan feasts and idolatry and things offered to idols; chapters 8, 9 and 10 talks about that. They had goofed up the proper place of women in the church; chapter 11 talks about that. They had misconstrued the whole dimension of spiritual gifts; chapter 12 talks about that. And they had lost hold of the one great thing, love; chapter 13 talks about that.
They had let the entire mass of the satanic system that existed in their society infiltrate the church. And once it all came in, in with it came pagan-style of religion, with all of the ecstasies, and all of its eroticisms, and all of its sensualities; they bought the whole bag. And so the whole thing is a confused amalgamation of truth and error. A modern parallelism would be that of Roman Catholicism, which is a combination of Christianity out of the Bible and ancient Baal worship, and the Mother and Child cult that was originally known as Ashtoreth and Tammuz. And the same thing occurred in the Corinthian church. It was Christianity in part and paganism in part, all wedded together.
Now if you study the Greco-Roman world the time of the Corinthian church, you would know that they had various priests and priestesses; and people who were devotees of the gods would go to these great temples, and they would worship these priests and priestesses. And it was very common for a devotee would go into an ecstasy. An ecstasy means to go out of yourself. That’s the literal meaning of the word, to go out of yourself. They would literally flip out, and they would go into an unconscious state, in which they would have all kinds of phenomena occur, a psychic kind of phenomena. They would believe that when they went out of themselves, they literally left the body, and they ascended into space, and they connected to deity, whatever deity they were worshiping, and they began to commune with the deity; and once they began to commune with that deity, they would begin to speak the language of the gods.
This was a very common thing in their culture. So that term used in Corinthians, glōssais lalein, to speak in tongues, was not invented by Bible writers, but was a term used commonly in the Greco-Roman culture to speak of pagan ecstasy, and going out of the body, connecting with the deity, and in a mystical way beginning to speak the language of the gods, which came out as some kind of gobbledygook and gibberish.
Now the Greeks even had a word for this ecstatic religious experience. You’ll be interested to know what the word was. It was the word eros. Remember that word? We sometimes translate it as sensual love. But the word is a bigger word than that; it has a broader meaning. The word eros simply means the desire for the sensual, or the desire for the erotic, or the desire for the ecstasy, or the desire for the ultimate experience or the feeling.
And the kind of religion they had was erotic religion. It was religion designed to be felt. It was sensual, ecstatic kind of religion. And you’ll remember, if you studied those religions, that when they went to those temples and to those priestesses they actually entered into orgies, didn’t they. And that whole idea of erotic and sexual and sensual and ecstatic and the gibberish that went on with divine utterances, all was rolled into one big ball under the mystery religions that had spawned in Babylon and had come into the Corinthian society. And I’m not going to take the time to read you all of the information on that, but there is tremendous historical information that tells us that this did occur.
https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/1871/the-truth-about-tongues-part-1
My Rock
Member
The gift of tongues, both in the early Church and today, is often described as the supernatural ability to speak in languages unknown to the speaker. On the Day of Pentecost, the apostles spoke in various known languages, enabling the diverse crowd in Jerusalem to hear "the wonderful works of God" in their own tongues (Acts 2:6-11). These languages were familiar to the listeners but unknown to the speakers, emphasizing the universal reach of the gospel message.
In contemporary times, those who receive the gift of tongues describe speaking in an unlearned language, which may be an earthly language or an unknown heavenly language. The specific dialects or languages spoken can vary widely, reflecting the diversity of God’s creation. Some believers report speaking in languages that resemble ancient or modern languages from different parts of the world, while others describe their tongues as heavenly languages that transcend earthly dialects, as suggested in 1 Corinthians 13:1, where Paul speaks of "tongues of men and of angels."
Despite the differences in dialects or languages, the essence of the gift remains consistent: it serves as a sign of the Holy Spirit's presence and power in a believer’s life (Mark 16:17). Whether on this continent or the other side of the planet, now or 2,000 years ago, the purpose of tongues is to glorify God, edify the Church (1 Corinthians 14:4), and sometimes serve as a miraculous sign to unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22). The specific languages may differ, but the spiritual significance remains the same, demonstrating the continuity of God's work across time and geography.
Frankly speaking, I wouldn't trust wiki on this one.