Open/Honest discussion on Speaking/Praying in 'Tongues'

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Regularly used also is Jude 20 "But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit."

A while ago I learned that approx. 50% of evangelicals speak in tongues. I was surprised. And their number is growing faster than those who do not speak in tongues. What that told me is this -- tongues was the great divide -- half do and half don't -- among those who are genuine children of God.

CMW, how do they know their tongue speaking is of the Holy Spirit? Why would you ask that question? Of course, it is! It has to be! They are speaking the heavenly prayer language! It is the gift of the Spirit! Shame on you for even asking!

My wife genuinely (she says) spoke in tongues years ago, before the LC, and has not since. She gets upset when others (like me) say anything negatively about speaking in tongues. Her point is actually good -- tongues is in the Bible, and they are a gift of the Holy Spirit. End of discussion. To my knowledge, her not speaking in tongues has never been an issue with all her friends there.

We did meet with the Church of Christ for a while. One day after the meeting, out of the blue the minister starts off telling me his little spiel about "tongues have ceased." My wife started walking our way, and I indicated to him that this was not a good topic to discuss in front of her. He decided to disregard my word. She never went back. Later the minister apologized, but the damage was done. As a reaction to our former LC days, once anyone decides to critique other believers, she smells pride and, since she has a very sensitive nose, it stinks.

Amigos and amigas in Christ,

First off...remember on occasion I pray in tongues. I learned to pray in tongues being around my charasmatic Christian friends. Many have experienced a spontaneous outburst of praying in tongues when asked if they wanted to be filled with the Holy Spirit or be baptized in the Holy Spirit with fire. I never experienced that.

To your question why would I ask the question if a person's tongue speaking is the Holy Spirit praying through them when it is scriptural:


1) Just like we had people in the LC who called on the Lord, used the same LC tone and were not filled with the Spirit of Christ or His Word, and WE COULD TELL, I have been in prayer meetings (tongue prayer meetings) where people are walking around praying out loud in tongues. No English words just tongues. I could often tell when a person was truly in spirit praying in the Spirit. Others had no presence of the Lord. It was just vain babbling.

2) Is it not true that not all "believers" are born again? Just because they 'believe' in God and they pray to God, does not constitute them as born again, regenerated believers right? I used to be one of them and I more than certain I am not alone on this board with that experience.

We even have some people here who used to be in the LC, believed in God and now they don't. Really? How can a person truly have a relationship with their Creator and then deny Him. Well. I suppose if Judas Iscariot denied Jesus as his Lord, it has to still be true today. Thank God we have a very Patient and Merciful God....for right now anyway.

Is it not true that many people who pray in tongues are not filled with the Spirit but they think they are? And just as many are people who do not pray in tongues but are born again are also not filled with the Spirit? How many times have we heard people pray at the table or wherever and their prayers are just plain dead! Emotional prayers or the lack does not constitute praying -in spirit-. There has to be a deep connection to our Creator while praying. And believe me. I am not always praying in spirit when I am in prayer! Sometimes I pray from my mind or my emotions. I do try to catch myself otherwise the Holy Spirit will correct me. He's good about doing that.

3) I remember reading there are other religions whose congregants pray 'in tongues' too. Mormons, Catholic Charasmatics who still say the "Hail Mary" and pray the rosary also speak in tongues.

I just found this on a google search:

Charles R. Smith says on pages 20-22 of his book, Tongues in Biblical Perspective:

IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.--Tongues occupied a significant place in ancient Greek religion. The seeress at Delphi, not far from Corinth, spoke in tongues. [ MY insert here: Perhaps that is where the Corinthians picked up speaking in tongues? Maybe huh? -]

According to Plutarch (A.D. 44-117), interpreters were kept in attendance to explain her incoherent utterances. Many scholars have stated that tongues were experienced in the mystery religions (Osirius, Mithra, Eleusinian, Dionsyian, and Orphic cults). Some have concluded that the unintelligible lists of "words" in the "magical papyri" and in certain Gnostic "prayers" are records of ecstatic utterances. About A.D. 180 Celsus reported ecstatic utterances among the Gnostics. Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 120-198) described tongues speaking as it was practiced by the devotees of the Syrian goddess, Juno.

Today shamans (witch doctors, priests, or medicine men) in Haiti, Greenland, Micronesia, and countries of Africa, Australia, Asia, and North and South America speak in tongues. Several groups use drugs to aid in inducing the ecstatic state and utterances. Voodoo practitioners speak in tongues. Buddhist and Shinto priest have been heard speaking in tongues. Moslems have spoken in tongues, and an ancient tradition even reports that Mohammed himself spoke in tongues. According to his own account, after his ecstatic experiences he found it difficult to return to "logical and intelligible speech" (Kelsey, p. 143).

And the Lord also says in Matthew 7:

“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. 22 On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ 23 But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you whoare workers of iniquities’

So is it not possible people who speak in tongues might suffer the same condemnation as these people noted in Matthew 7?


So while I am not saying Speaking in Tongues is not in the scriptures, I wonder why it is one of the great divides among the believers in Christ? I do not care if people pray / speak in tongues. I don't think anyone here does either. But many of those people believe the only way to be filled with the Spirit or be baptized in the Spirit is by the evidence of speaking in 'tongues'. I told a friend yesterday there is no evidence when Jesus Himself was Filled with the Holy Spirit after John baptized Him, He prayed in tongues for 40 days and nights! He rebuked Satan with the Word of God. But my friend wanted to argue with me. No biggie to me. We've been friends since first grade...and we are approaching 60 yrs young. UGH!


When I tell them I was filled with the Spirit when I got saved and did not speak in tongues I am told I was NOT filled with the Holy Spirit. Imagine that!

While I also know not everyone who gets saved is initially filled with the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is in them when they got saved, if they truly got saved because The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of JESUS and is GOD Himself. I know I was because of my immediate transformation.

That is a judgmental attitude taken towards me. I do not criticize them for speaking/praying in tongues. I do not think either 'camp' should criticize each other for speaking in tongues or not. As true believers, we ought to build one another's Faith in The Word so they can be strong in the Lord and lead people to Christ themselves. Is that not what Jesus instructed us ALL to do when He said " Go out and disciple the nations" ?

If people speak in tongues, fine. If they do not fine too.

So my next question to you Ohio, my good friend... is why does your wife not speak in tongues now that you have left the LC and attend a tongue speaking church? I am not judging her or you. I am simply curious!

I hope others ex Lcrs or current LCrs or anyone who is a lurker will chime in too because I want to hear and learn from their experiences.

Blessings everyone!

Carol G

[OBW]

Interesting topic.

Until just before I turned 18, I was part of the Assemblies of God (AOG), one of the original, but somewhat mainstream among charismatics. We attended one of the larger assemblies in town, so it was not hell-fire and brimstone preaching all the time. More like Pentecostal Baptists. (Not saying anything bad about Baptists.)

In my last year there, I had become somewhat disheartened that there was really so little supporting the miraculous gifts. Not that they were not there. But just not so prominent.

My memories were of things that were somewhat forced, sprinkled with events that seemed quite spontaneous and even possibly God-driven. But almost all of it was surrounding speaking in tongues. Never anything I knew to be any actual healing or other miracles.

And, now that I have read 1 Corinthians many times without the Pentecostal overlay, I can say that I do not clearly agree with the cessationists (tongues will simply cease) but cannot support the extreme push that is found in so many charismatic assemblies. None of the gifts were "advertised" as "yours for the asking," but were provided as the Spirit deemed necessary.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by OBW

Interesting topic.

Until just before I turned 18, I was part of the Assemblies of God (AOG), one of the original, but somewhat mainstream among charismatics. We attended one of the larger assemblies in town, so it was not hell-fire and brimstone preaching all the time. More like Pentecostal Baptists. (Not saying anything bad about Baptists.)

In my last year there, I had become somewhat disheartened that there was really so little supporting the miraculous gifts. Not that they were not there. But just not so prominent.

My memories were of things that were somewhat forced, sprinkled with events that seemed quite spontaneous and even possibly God-driven. But almost all of it was surrounding speaking in tongues. Never anything I knew to be any actual healing or other miracles.

And, now that I have read 1 Corinthians many times without the Pentecostal overlay, I can say that I do not clearly agree with the cessationists (tongues will simply cease) but cannot support the extreme push that is found in so many charismatic assemblies. None of the gifts were "advertised" as "yours for the asking," but were provided as the Spirit deemed necessary.

I am guessing you do not pray/speak un tongues. Yet you did at one time. Am I correct OBW? Were you simply disillusioned by the whole AOG experience? When you prayed in tongues especially at the off set, was it spontaneous?

Did the LC life move you away from tongues? Would you be willing to pray in tongues again today? Why or why not?

I am simply trying to figure things out.

Thanks Mike!

Blessings in abundance!

Carol G

[OBW]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

I am guessing you do not pray/speak un tongues. Yet you did at one time. Am I correct OBW? Were you simply disillusioned by the whole AOG experience? When you prayed in tongues especially at the off set, was it spontaneous?

Did the LC life move you away from tongues? Would you be willing to pray in tongues again today? Why or why not?

I am simply trying to figure things out.

Thanks Mike!

Blessings in abundance!

Carol G

The truth is that I never spoke in tongues.

I started doing some research into the basis for the teaching, primarily to be able to support it to others that I knew from other denominations.

The experience gave me a reason to be less certain. I saw the reference to speaking in tongues at Pentecost, once among the Samaritans, then at the house of Cornelius, then the parts in those three chapters of 1 Corinthians. And while I did not have the mental acuity to see the things in those three chapters that I do now, they did not simply endorse it as something for everyone.

And that bothered me.

Along with the fact that it seemed that really only a very few at our church actually did anything other than engage in some kind of random jabbering when there was a time when all were praying. Rarely was there anything that could be passed off as some kind of language. While not explicitly stated, Paul seemed to suggest that even the "groanings" of the Spirit were still words and thoughts that we were unable to come up with, not just repeated monosyllabic gibberish.

Having said that, there were some occasions when I sensed something "in the air" upon entering the sanctuary and before the service was over, someone (generally from among two or three specific people) had risen and spoke something that was more complex than the gibberish I just mentioned and someone else (or on very rare occasion, the same person) then translated it.

But even then, there was never any situation in which the language was known by someone else in the room. And virtually always, the English spoken was some kind of near-quotation of either OT (generally) scripture or a typical warning from a hell-fire kind of sermon. I don't recall anything that was unique or specifically meaningful (although years later my mom mentioned that the "warnings" were typically assumed to be for the benefit of some unsaved person there, and not for the majority of us — in other words, the assembly as a whole pitchforked it).

On the whole, nothing that stands out as a remarkable evidence that God spoke or acted. And, as I mentioned, I do not recall ever seeing any kind of actual miracle. There were stories about them in the past. Or somewhere else. But not there. Or anywhere else in the general vicinity.

I don't think that anyone is intentionally faking it in these kinds of groups (although there are plenty faking it in some groups) — just so determined that it has to be true that they believe what is otherwise unlikely. They suggest that, to begin to speak in tongues you should "help out" by jabbering. In the kind of emotionally charged environment of those prayer times, I would now be hard-pressed to accept much as genuine just because somebody "felt" something euphoric.

But at the same time, I do not deny that God can do as he pleases in these areas. But the first example was a bunch of Galilean fishermen speaking in languages that they clearly did not know while people who did know them were present. The sign was more to the hearer than the speaker. The speaker probably had little idea what was going on. And surely would make no personal claim about it. Peter surely did not. He declared that everything going on was according to God, as evidence of the truth of Christ.

Not something to make him and the others stronger in their faith or to have a special blessing.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

But even then, there was never any situation in which the language was known by someone else in the room. And virtually always, the English spoken was some kind of near-quotation of either OT (generally) scripture or a typical warning from a hell-fire kind of sermon. I don't recall anything that was unique or specifically meaningful (although years later my mom mentioned that the "warnings" were typically assumed to be for the benefit of some unsaved person there, and not for the majority of us — in other words, the assembly as a whole pitchforked it).

Had to laugh at this one. I find it interesting that a proper interpretation of tongues -- a bona fide gift of the Holy Spirit -- could be "pitchforked" by the entire congregation as hay, straw, or stubble. Another feature seems to be that the tongue-message seems to mimic the general ministry of the church. In my congregation, there is no "hell-fire" kind of sermon, and hence, none of the tongue-messages nor their interpretations are of the "hell-fire" kind. All the ones I have heard are the "blessing" kind of message.

It's actually the only part of the service which appears spontaneous and open to the members to initiate. Perhaps I am wrong. These tongue-messages and their interpretations could be planned for.

From my limited observation, tongues have 3 purposes --

1. General praise and worship. This is both public and private.
2. Messages given in meetings, which require someone to interpret.
3. Gospel preaching, like in the book of Acts. I have not seen this.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Had to laugh at this one. I find it interesting that a proper interpretation of tongues -- a bona fide gift of the Holy Spirit -- could be "pitchforked" by the entire congregation as hay, straw, or stubble. Another feature seems to be that the tongue-message seems to mimic the general ministry of the church. In my congregation, there is no "hell-fire" kind of sermon, and hence, none of the tongue-messages nor their interpretations are of the "hell-fire" kind. All the ones I have heard are the "blessing" kind of message.

It's actually the only part of the service which appears spontaneous and open to the members to initiate. Perhaps I am wrong. These tongue-messages and their interpretations could be planned for.

From my limited observation, tongues have 3 purposes --

1. General praise and worship. This is both public and private.
2. Messages given in meetings, which require someone to interpret.
3. Gospel preaching, like in the book of Acts. I have not seen this.

Suggesting that it is just hay, straw or stubble might be a little harsh. But they were mostly sure that it was not for them personally, but for some backsliding or never-saved person in their midst. And "backsliding" is a significant problem in a group that follows the Arminian thought on salvation (you can lose it).

Virtually all of the tongues that were not simply part of that jabbering during prayer times fell into category 2. And they sounded like the warnings of an OT prophet. Sometimes prefaced by phrases like "Ye, my people" and the like.

And no matter what, you have to remember that I am slightly more than 40 years removed from the AOG, so despite the rather uncanny ability to remember details of long-past events, we are really working on "long past" at this point.

[countmeworthy]

Thanks all for your input. I concluded there are a lot of very strong true believers in Christ who are neither for or against tongue praying/speaking.

What I have learned is most non tongue/praying-speaking fellow brethren are not critical or judgmental of those who do. But my findings is most tongue-speaking brethren wants ALL believers to pray in tongues!

Many think we are not filled with the Holy Spirit if we don't or we are not baptized in the Holy Spirit if we do not speak in tongues.

That is absolutely not true!

However while there have been many who spontaneously spoke / speak in tongues, no one ever interprets what they are saying! They all acknowledge that if we speak in tongues in public there should be an interpreter but there is never anyone around to interpret!

I also think that if Nee/Lee had pushed us to speak in tongues, there would be a lot more posters / LC lurkers / LC members speaking and praying in tongues. I will probably get hammered for this comment so I'll go first:

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

If people speak in tongues, fine. If they do not fine too.

So my next question to you Ohio, my good friend... is why does your wife not speak in tongues now that you have left the LC and attend a tongue speaking church? I am not judging her or you. I am simply curious!

The first time was truly spontaneously of the Spirit, and unless the Lord wants her to speak in tongues again, she is content without tongues.

Tongues is a gift that some receive. If every one is speaking in tongues, then we should question whether it is the real thing, or just a performance. I would hate to think how many perform in tongues due to peer pressure.

[james73]

I do not pray in tongues, but I learned to "speak in tongues" just to satisfy my own curiosity that it was nothing but a physical ability and, essentially a misguided power play by the church.

My experience was at ICA in Hong Kong, an AOG church, I was at the Alpha course "Away Weekend" and there had been a lot of talk about tongues. It was a mark of pride, a sign of "spiritual maturity" which to me (and given the characters of the people that did it) meant it was a load of nonsense. There was such a false humility in the humility in which the tongue-speakers had, they used it so glibly as if to show how easy it was to them, which only caused the others to marvel more.

One girl in particular convinced me there was something wrong with this - because she WANTED it, so bad! She was almost crying at dinner, she said "why didn't God give me this gift?" And the slightly superior church lady was at her side, "there there, we all have different gifts [but mine is better than yours]."

So, curiosity aroused, hen I got back I researched it, delved into glossolalia, found it was something quite easy to learn to do, one of those little tricks like learning to whistle or blow bubble gum, that you always feel faintly foolish practicing alone but the payoffs when back in company are huge It's really no big deal, take away the spiritual mulch, I did it pretty well in about two minutes. It's quite fun, quite novel - and if I'd been surrounded by people in awe and praising the Lord I am sure I would have found it a spiritual experience..... but I think if everybody knew how easy it was, the myth would dissolve and nobody would bother doing it.

Anyway, there are some who say it's the genuine Holy Spirit and I would never take that away from them or even disagree or debate with them - I am sure there are genuine cases, but I also think it's become a thing, a power play, an attraction or amusement ride to give the kids or newcomers something to aim at. Not far off the spiritual maturity games played by LSM, come to think of it.

I was gonna post a scientific study I found a while back but it would break copyright. A Linguistic Analysis of Glossolalia by Michael Motley, Communication Quarterly Vol 30, No. 1, Winter 1981. It found that there was significant language structure within "tongues" speaking, not related to speakers' own language and likely not coming from traditionally understood cognitive centres. The implications of that study were for language learning, they weren't examining it from the spiritual side - but that's an interesting finding and adds credence to those who would say it is from the Holy Spirit. Certainly according to those findings tongue speaking is not "made up" and is coming from somewhere deeper than the brain which controls normal language/speech. That defeats my own point somewhat but I think it's interesting - and hiding knowledge which disagrees with one's arguments is never a good strategy