Speaking in Tongues: Gift or Myth?

UpSetters will discuss the practice of speaking in tongues. What does the Bible say? What have we been taught? Do the two align?
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within the content are solely the individuals and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the Allegheny East Conference or its affiliates.
UpSet Store - "helping others in "upsetting" situations"
theupsetpodcas...

[@rodneysmith3578]

Pat, You would have us to believe that there is room in our understanding to allow for Corey's interpretation for those who peep and mutter! You were more offended by me using CAPS than you were to tell him that he was wrong !!!! Amazing.

[@rodneysmith3578]

Tasha, The correct position taken by the SDA church is that any language spoken in tongues must be an intelligible known language. Even angels when they came to earth spoke a language understood by those they addressed. Don't get it twisted by introducing New Theories into the church that cannot be supported by the bible or what we as a whole have come to accept .Tell Pat that if he is going to be on a public Podcast to wear his Big Boy Pants. That way his feelings won't get hurt so easy. smile!!!!

[@katrinawilliams2228]

What one has to decide is “am I going to going to believe the scriptures, or my opinion?” Is the Bible real enough to me that I will rest on it as the final authority, or am I going to filter it through the lens of my “natural” understanding? What I appreciated about Corey is that he presented the scriptures as they are without coloring with his “personal” opinion. The problem is there have been people who have acted in an unbiblical fashion and presented this gift in an outlandish and even foolish fashion that people tend to look at that instead of the scriptures! The spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet!

[@kavikv.d.hexenholtz3474]

There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" - and there is only one type - when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually, but not always, 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. The "nail in the coffin", so-to-speak, is that _any and all_ phonological rules (rules governing how sounds are put together in a given language - what is allowed and what is disallowed) governing a speaker's native language, will _also_ govern their tongues-speech. That fact alone negates anything that can be construed as 'divine' in nature and cements that fact that it is a self-created phenomenon. Further, this subset of phonemes mentioned above typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically. Occasionally some speakers will use two or more subsets of phonemes to generate glossolalia, producing what, to them, sounds like two (or more) distinct “tongues languages”, thus claiming to be able to speak in “divers tongues”. There is absolutely _nothing_ that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot be explained in relatively simple 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. _Nowhere_ in the Bible is modern tongues-speech advocated or evidenced. “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. I'm not doubting or questioning the 'tongues experience'; glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. As one commenter put it, “Speaking in tongues distracts the ego/analytical/conscious mind while leaving the subconscious (the heart) wide open to import the divine." 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. It is only in certain Christian denominations where is it construed as something it never was. “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”. ‘Tongues’ (read, *‘languages’* ) - the divine gift, is the God/Holy Spirit given ability to effortlessly learn to speak and be understood through real-language barriers. It is not xenoglossy (as many people incorrectly assume), nor is it the self-created non-cognitive non-language utterance of what certain Christian denominations are producing today (modern tongues-speech). 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”. It’s always a bit interesting to see how different tongues-speakers skate around what for them is that awkward discrepancy between the real, rational languages of Pentecost and the so-called “prayer language “ of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians. The solution seems to be instituting various “types” of “tongues”. There is only one type of “tongue(s)” in the Bible when referring to something spoken - real rational language(s).

[@KingJamesOnlyPlease]

I won't bother listening to the podcast, but i believe God's Word rather than the worshipping of messengers. Col 2:18: "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind," 1Cor 14:2: "For 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."... 1Cor 14:13-15: "Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 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, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."