Bible Study WHERE DO PENTECOSTAL 'TONGUES' ACTUALLY COME FROM?

[destiny]

That's correct, Brad. But then, 'tongues' (no such thing) is but one of the questionable practices that are used by the pretentious ('showy') charismatic culture. One could dress in a wolf outfit and howl at the moon, put the 'this is of the Holy Spirit' tag on it, and who could question it ...?

By the way, Brad ...a little off-topic, but I always assumed that you were a Christian. Now I see by your avatar that you are not. Were you at one time, and did this change ...or what? I'm just curious since my best friend and I are doing a great deal of questioning the Bible lately. We still believe in a Creator-God, but . . . . . .well ...

I have a question ...and it's a little off topic but I feel it's important.
Why would anybody turn their back on God based on how others represent Him?
Couldn't that be likened to me turning my back on my own Dad because I hated the way my sister or even my neighborhood characterized him?
Or could it be that I never really knew Him so I believed that all they were saying in his behalf must be true? That must grieve and break the heart of God. When we stand before Him we will only be responsible for how we responded to Him individually.
It's got to be through personal relationship that we know who He is, not in what others are doing or saying.
Brad...I figured you for a reformation type of believer but never did I take you for an unbeliever, you know too much truth.
If I judged God based on what other christians or so called christians were saying or doing I would have left Him years ago.
I can't leave the one who saved me from myself and gave me a new life. It would only be my own tragic loss.
I don't want to argue with anybody about this, it's just something I care deeply about. Thats all

 

[SputnikBoy]

Well, so far Brad hasn't responded (actually, he's probably sleeping!) but I will be curious as to his response to the question. I, too, am just wondering and have no particular agenda for asking.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

That's correct, Brad. But then, 'tongues' (no such thing) is but one of the questionable practices that are used by the pretentious ('showy') charismatic culture. One could dress in a wolf outfit and howl at the moon, put the 'this is of the Holy Spirit' tag on it, and who could question it ...?

Privyet, comrade. Actually howling does occur in some of these churches but I don't think they've gotten to the wolf outfits yet.

By the way, Brad ...a little off-topic, but I always assumed that you were a Christian. Now I see by your avatar that you are not. Were you at one time, and did this change ...or what? I'm just curious since my best friend and I are doing a great deal of questioning the Bible lately. We still believe in a Creator-God, but . . . . . .well ...

Yes, at one time I was a bible carrying, everyday fellowshipping, non t.v. watching, Jack Chick tract distributing, all-night prayer meeting Christian. I witnessed on street corners, gave ALL my savings to charity, and if you quoted practically any verse in the NT I would either know which chapter it was in or could find it in less than 30 seconds. What happened? Long story. Basically a lot of disappointments and doubts concerning the faith accumulated and I reached a point where my faith was in limbo for many years. Then I started researching the whole subject from a more neutral, non-biased standpoint, and realized that I had accepted many things, as a Christian, without question, which I should have questioned.

I don't know what I am right now, other than I just me. I'm not sure I have ever even come to the point where I deny, for example, that Jesus rose again. But I can't say I believe it either, so I guess that disqualifies me as a Christian. It may be true, but the whole Christian religion (along, of course, with all other religions) seem very questionable to me, all things considered. Basically I have a problem with anyone who believes they have discovered the whole truth of existence. Once you think you have found it, you stop seeking, you only seek in the context of the truth you believe you have found.

Now I must comment on a point which comes up immediately in regards to any testimony like mine. Most Christians don't believe that one can really be a Christian and then not be. They will say you never were in the first place. This most assuredly is not the case. There are thousands upon thousands of folks out there who believed they had an experience with God and were as committed as any current believer on this forum but who no longer believe. I feel it is difficult for Christians to accept this because it is scary to them. That is, if you can really be a Christian and then stop believing, it may happen to them, and they don't want to entertain that possibility. I know when I was so active in the faith, I NEVER could have believed there would come a day when I could no longer say I believed wholeheartedly. I would have bet my life on it. But I was wrong.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

And oh yes, I spoke in tongues, and still can :smt106

At least, that which passes for tongues nowadays.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Thanks so much for the 'testimony', Brad. It IS most interesting. As mentioned, a friend and I have also begun to question our Christian beliefs recently. I'm not sure where it will take us but we need to cast aside those things as taught by 'our church' (for a time anyway) and do some research of our own. Who knows, it may lead us back to where we came from.

ACTUALLY ...it's mainly the Bible itself and not necessarily the teachings of our church (SDA) that we're questioning ...the first few books of Genesis, the Gospel of Matthew, the epistles of Paul, etc. There are a number of things that just don't compute and the exercising of 'faith' alone, for US anyway, is just not a satisfactory concept for belief. Paul so often seems to be at odds with the teachings of Jesus but mainstream Christianity has all but replaced Jesus WITH Paul. I could go on and on . . .

Anyway, as mentioned, we're not sure in which direction we're headed but this DOES seem to be something that we MUST do.

Thanks again, Brad.

 

[SputnikBoy]

And oh yes, I spoke in tongues, and still can :smt106

At least, that which passes for tongues nowadays.

:D : : :

 

[lecoop]

Are you suggesting that, whenever I hear babble in a Pentecostal church, I'm to assume that it's 'angel-speak'? And, just what IS the criteria for determining so-called 'genuine' from 'fake'? There surely HAS to be a way of knowing.

I am only suggesting that you believe what is written. Have you ever heard of "faith?" It is believing in what you cannot prove with the senses:
"...perceiving as real fact what is not revealed to the senses...Heb 11:1 Amplified)

There is no way to know for sure, unless it is you doing it: then you know for sure. However, there are some verses that you will have to come face to face with:

Acts 1
4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

There can be no doubt that this was a command - not a suggestion. You will have to decide if it was a command that reaches through time to the entire church. One clue is, those that believe it is for the entire church age, seek the mighty baptism, and receive it. If you decide that it is not for you, then be prepared for the first words from Jesus to you to be, "Why didn't you receive my mighty baptism with the Holy Spirit?"

Paul said,

Acts 19:2 "...Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?"

You will have to ask yourself if you could ask this same question to fellow believers, with your current belief system. Paul is clearly making this an experience subsequent to salvation. It is therefore not salvation, but a second experience. Will you ask your friends at church, if they have received the Holy Spirit since they became beleivers?

Paul said,

1 Cor. 14:15 "...What is it then? I will pray with the spirit..."

There can be no doubt that Paul's meaning is to pray with tongues. Anything else blows the context. No, the context is tongues. So, do you pray in tongues?

If you say no, then you cannot fulfill this verse! Period. Would God have a verse that only some can fulfill? Of course not! But you have to become a believer to fulfill this verse. It takes faith. You know, that thing in us that really pleases God? It means to believe in His words, and quite doubting.

Coop

 

[lecoop]

You're half-right, it is gibberish, but it is made up, consciously or sub-consciously, by the speaker, not by an omnipotent Spirit. Are we really to believe that an omnipotent Spirit would provide a "sign" that was so easy to fake? If you don't believe that tongues are supposed to be verifiable human languages, then there is no evidence that anything supernatural is going on because any gibberish that occurs must be accepted as the "real thing" as there is no way to test the real thing.

I can ask you the same thing I asked SputnikBoy. Why don't you just believe what is written?

"For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit..."

This is Paul's conclusion. He says that when he prays in an unknown tongue.....did you catch that? What did Paul use tongues for? To pray! He goes on..."my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." It is his spirit man praying, and he has no clue what he is praying. Yet Paul spends time praying this way! Do you? Paul has just said that when he prays in tongues - so He does pray in tongues - but when he does, he cannot understand what he has been praying. So Paul said that he would also pray in Greek, so that he could spend some time in praying with his understanding.

What is important here to understand is, after Paul has written that "he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries," Paul still prays in tongues. Why would he do that? Obviously, Paul knew things about tongues that you do not know. He know that any gift from God would be very valuable.

So why then, are you dissing what God has given?

Coop

 

[BradtheImpaler]

I can ask you the same thing I asked SputnikBoy. Why don't you just believe what is written?

"For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit..."

This is Paul's conclusion. He says that when he prays in an unknown tongue.....did you catch that? What did Paul use tongues for? To pray! He goes on..."my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." It is his spirit man praying, and he has no clue what he is praying. Yet Paul spends time praying this way! Do you? Paul has just said that when he prays in tongues - so He does pray in tongues - but when he does, he cannot understand what he has been praying. So Paul said that he would also pray in Greek, so that he could spend some time in praying with his understanding.

What is important here to understand is, after Paul has written that "he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries," Paul still prays in tongues. Why would he do that? Obviously, Paul knew things about tongues that you do not know. He know that any gift from God would be very valuable.

So why then, are you dissing what God has given?

Coop

How do you prove it is a "gift from God" when it is so easily faked/imitated/psychogically induced? How do you tell the difference?

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Thanks so much for the 'testimony', Brad. It IS most interesting. As mentioned, a friend and I have also begun to question our Christian beliefs recently. I'm not sure where it will take us but we need to cast aside those things as taught by 'our church' (for a time anyway) and do some research of our own. Who knows, it may lead us back to where we came from.

ACTUALLY ...it's mainly the Bible itself and not necessarily the teachings of our church (SDA) that we're questioning ...the first few books of Genesis, the Gospel of Matthew, the epistles of Paul, etc. There are a number of things that just don't compute and the exercising of 'faith' alone, for US anyway, is just not a satisfactory concept for belief. Paul so often seems to be at odds with the teachings of Jesus but mainstream Christianity has all but replaced Jesus WITH Paul. I could go on and on . . .

Anyway, as mentioned, we're not sure in which direction we're headed but this DOES seem to be something that we MUST do.

Thanks again, Brad.

You're welcome. I am not going to try to deconvert you or anyone. I think the important thing is to KEEP THINKING, as you are doing, no matter what your current belief, and don't believe that common sense and logic are "of the devil" as some belief systems would have you assume.

 

[chris overy]

i am going to look up scriptures on speaking in toungues and share them with everyone. you guys seem to be .arguing without putting all the scripture about toungues together and studiing them all as a whole. we can not get the complete revelation of things from one or two verses. if toungues was only a different worldly language then about 70% of the world speaks in toungues. anyone can go learn a language in school go to church and speak it and be called a christian with the gift of toungues. however that is contrary to the word of god aswell. wide is not the road to salvation.

chris

 

[BradtheImpaler]

anyone can go learn a language in school go to church and speak it and be called a christian with the gift of toungues. however that is contrary to the word of god aswell. wide is not the road to salvation.

Point is, there's no need to go as far as to go to school to learn a legitimate language to fool someone like Lecoop. All you need to is make up 2 or 3 words and, by his standard, he would have to assume it was genuine. Then have someone make up an "interpretation" and wham! Two miraculous gifts of the Spirit! :roll:

 

[chris overy]

brad that is a pretty hard judgement to put on another. i feel that that is un called for. i am sure there are probably people that do that. but since we do not have the power or authority to read the hearts of man we do not know what there true intent is or if it is infact the holy spirit or not. pleasde be careful judging heart intents for we do not know for sure.

chris.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

brad that is a pretty hard judgement to put on another. i feel that that is un called for. i am sure there are probably people that do that

Since you are sure there are people who do that why do you accuse me of judging unfairly?

but since we do not have the power or authority to read the hearts of man we do not know what there true intent is or if it is infact the holy spirit or not. pleasde be careful judging heart intents for we do not know for sure.

Again you contradict yourself but the point is, faking tongues doesn't have to be done consciously. One can put his mind in "neutral" and utter incoherent "words" which are actually a juxtapositioning of syllables of the native language of the speaker. Professional linguisists have studied tapes of modern day "tongues speakers" and concluded that is exactly what is happening. I doubt very much that the "tongues of angels" are actually a sub-conscious mixup of english words.

Also concerning your comment about not knowing whether it is the Holy Spirit, that makes my case perfectly. If all the speaker is uttering is gibberish, how do you know whether it's from God or whether he's making it up, consciously or sub-consciously? And further, why would any rational person imagine that such a thing may be from God since there is no evidence that anything supernatural is occuring in the first place?

 

[chris overy]

no i am not contradicting myself. i do not believe the same as the penticostal church. however. i will not judge the heart of an individual.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

no i am not contradicting myself. i do not believe the same as the penticostal church. however. i will not judge the heart of an individual.

What are you talking about? :-? You AGREED - saying you are sure there are people who pretend to speak in tongues.

 

[lecoop]

How do you prove it is a "gift from God" when it is so easily faked/imitated/psychogically induced? How do you tell the difference?

You don't worry or concern yourself with what others are doing. You seek God and receive the mighty baptism with the HS for yourself. When you speak in tongues, you will KNOW that it is the HS. How will you know? By faith, and by the inward witness of the HS. And then, you will notice that the moment you start to pray, it will be like you are transported into His very presense.

Coop

 

[lecoop]

Point is, there's no need to go as far as to go to school to learn a legitimate language to fool someone like Lecoop. All you need to is make up 2 or 3 words and, by his standard, he would have to assume it was genuine. Then have someone make up an "interpretation" and wham! Two miraculous gifts of the Spirit! :roll:

Brad, you may try, but you cannot fool the HS, and those in the meeting that are sensitive to Him will know immediately that what was spoken was not from Him. It would be as if someone threw ice cold water on the service. Been there and seen that.

Coop

 

[lecoop]

Again you contradict yourself but the point is, faking tongues doesn't have to be done consciously. One can put his mind in "neutral" and utter incoherent "words" which are actually a juxtapositioning of syllables of the native language of the speaker. Professional linguisists have studied tapes of modern day "tongues speakers" and concluded that is exactly what is happening. I doubt very much that the "tongues of angels" are actually a sub-conscious mixup of english words.

Also concerning your comment about not knowing whether it is the Holy Spirit, that makes my case perfectly. If all the speaker is uttering is gibberish, how do you know whether it's from God or whether he's making it up, consciously or sub-consciously? And further, why would any rational person imagine that such a thing may be from God since there is no evidence that anything supernatural is occuring in the first place?

Brad, do you know anything about things of the Spirit? Almost everyone knows when something is done out of order, or not by the HS who is guiding the service. But then, maybe you have never been in a service where He is guiding it. If the HS is allowed to lead a service, most people there will know instantly when something of the flesh is done. I have been in services when someone gave a message in tongues, that was not from the Holy Spirit. Most of the congregation knew instantly. You can be sure, the one that gave that message in tongues was "counselled" after the service. I have seen the ushers take people right out of a service. Whenever the HS is allowed to lead a service, the devil will attempt to bring in a counterfit. I don't mean every service, but on occasion. This is why many pastors will not allow the HS to lead. They want to be in charge! They don't want anything strange to happen in thier service. It is a simple fact; when you have fire, you will on occasion, get wild-fire. But that is MUCH better than no fire at all.

The problem is, on Sunday morning all across our land, people lead the service, and the Holy Spirit is not allowed to move.

Coop

 

[SputnikBoy]

Okay, okay. Obviously, I'm in full agreement with Brad.

But, if we're to play the devil's advocate here (???) and go along with one's prayer at least being influenced by the Holy Spirit, could not the HS influence the prayer in such a way that the pray-er speaks in his/her own language so that he/she as well as God can understand? Why does the content of the prayer require unintellible utterances in order for it to be 'genuine'?

Besides that, Pentecostal 'tongues' are usually public displays and not in any way, shape, or form confined to prayer. Most babble on not even caring if there IS someone to interpret. Interpretation seems to be the least of their problems. But, in saying this, why would the HS go around in circles to arrive at the same point anyway? F'rinstance ...one speaks in 'tongues' to a congregation of English-speaking people. This requires an interpretation. The interpretation is relayed into English what was initially spoken in 'tongues'. Huh?

Sorry, this is just my rational mind taking over the issue again. I hate it when that happens.