Speaking in Tongues, from God, or something from Satan? Options

[västergötland]

No doubt about it, there is a counterfaith tounge out there aswell...

[Richard Sherwin]

To tell the truth I don't remember much more about it. (Hey it was 36 or so years back ) At the time it scared me, but fascinated me as well. The nursing home would invite different preachers from the community to have the Sunday service and quite often many church members from the preachers church would join them. I don't remember if it were those members who stood up or the patients of the home. I do remember my dad, who was the director of nurses, telling me later that that preacher would not be coming back.

I've learned since that that was, maybe still is, a common service of some churches up in the mountains, along with handling rattle snakes and copperheads. Of course they believe they are worshiping God, but personally I wouldn't bet eternity on it

Richard

[Seraphim7]

He has also talked about a black network, and a Chinese network for three of more years. Guess we'll see.

Hmmmm, now why would a "black or chinese network be needed? Makes one wonder, if it is about tappin into those pockets for support while keeping oneself separate in the process? Those networks would of course be "sub"sidiarys.

[saharafan]

I've argued here that glossolalia might be okay under certain circumstances.

It's also been noted here by others (rightly) that it occurs more in occult religions than in Christianity.

It would really concern me were I to witness this, but that's more because of the cold descending at the same time. People in the presence of evil spirits describe temperature drops like that.

I'm a bit at a loss, honestly, because I totally take what you're saying seriously. It just doesn't square with what I'm used to thinking about churches in general. It would seem to me like you'd have to have a critical mass of people in the congregation who have inwardly turned over to a spirit they know is not from God ...

Has anyone else had experiences like this? I stand by what I was saying about 1 Cor 14, on its own grounds, and I know I'll never convince saharafan and inga (which is okay, we're still in Christ together) ... but I for one want to hear other perspectives on this. I'd ask Richard to elaborate on this but It sounds like he'd rather not and I don't blame him.

SE

SoulEspresso,

A few other people have already posted their personal experiences involving churches or groups or people practicing speaking in tongues as ecstatic speech, or glossolalia; see for example

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=152872 justme post 198

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=148368 saharafan post 154

I thought I have read another story somewhere here but didn’t find it right now.

---------------------------------

Here are a few quotations from Ellen White that might help some of us. She doesn’t directly mention “speaking in tongues” but makes references to certain extreme emotional experiences and religious fanaticism. I believe they are directly applicable to exactly the kind of things happening in certain Pentecostal and Charismatic groups or denominations, like the Vineyard Church at the Toronto airport and many others. I just want to mention “Slain by the Spirit” and “Laughing in the Spirit” as two examples of those manifestations that those quotations would well apply to. Most of those churches where those things are happening commonly practice also ecstatic speech (glossolalia) in connection with those manifestations, in fact the “speaking in tongues” is usually preceding, introducing and leading to these ecstatic manifestations. The problem with Pentecostalism is not only “speaking in tongues”, it goes much deeper and further, and fanaticism has the tendency to increase once it is practiced and allowed in the church. That is another reason why I am so concerned with Pentecostal tendencies at 3ABN. I found those quotations on the website of the Biblical Research Institute: http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/d...0Fanaticism.htm

Holy Spirit and Fanaticism

Healthy Enthusiasm
"The Holy Spirit of God alone can create a healthy enthusiasm. Let God work, and let the human agent walk softly before Him, watching, waiting, praying, looking unto Jesus every moment, led and controlled by the precious Spirit, which is light and life" (2SM 16, 17 [Letter 68, 1894]).

Build Experience on the Word
"The Lord desires His servants today to preach the old gospel doctrine, sorrow for sin, repentance, and confession. We want old-fashioned sermons, old-fashioned customs, old-fashioned fathers and mothers in Israel. The sinner must be labored for, perseveringly, earnestly, wisely, until he shall see that he is a transgressor of God's law, and shall exercise repentance toward God, and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ" (2SM 19 [Undated manuscript 111]).
"It is through the Word-not feeling, not excitement-that we want to influence the people to obey the truth. On the platform of God's Word we can stand with safety" (3SM 375 [MS 115, 1908], emphasis in original).
"They flatter themselves that they are in conformity to the will of God because they feel happy; but when they are tested, when the Word of God is brought to bear upon their experience, they stop their ears from hearing the truth, saying, 'I am sanctified,' and that puts an end to the controversy. They will have nothing to do with searching the Scriptures to know what is truth, and prove that they are fearfully self-deceived. Sanctification means very much more than a flight of feeling.
"Excitement is not sanctification. Entire conformity to the will of our Father which is in heaven is alone sanctification, and the will of God is expressed in His holy law. The keeping of all the commandments of God is sanctification. Proving yourselves obedient children to God's Word is sanctification. The Word of God is to be our guide, not the opinions or ideas of men" (3SM 204 [RH, March 25, 1902]).

Holy Spirit Not in Bedlam and Noise
"True religion does not demand great bodily demonstrations. . . . These are no evidence of the presence of the Spirit of God" (2SM 26 [MS 97, 1909]).
"The things you have described as taking place in Indiana, the Lord has shown me would take place just before the close of probation. Every uncouth thing will be demonstrated. There will be shouting, with drums, music, and dancing. The senses of rational beings will become so confused that they cannot be trusted to make right decisions. And this is called the moving of the Holy Spirit.
"The Holy Spirit never reveals itself in such methods, in such a bedlam of noise. This is an invention of Satan to cover up his ingenious methods for making of none effect the pure, sincere, elevating, ennobling, sanctifying truth for this time" (2SM 36 [Letter 132, 1900]).
"During those trying days some of our most precious believers were led into fanaticism. I said further that before the end we would see strange manifestations by those who professed to be led by the Holy Spirit. There are those who will treat as something of great importance those peculiar manifestations, which are not of God, but which are calculated to divert the minds of many away from the teachings of the Word" (2SM 41 [Letter 338, 1908]).
"No greater harm could be done to the work of God at this time than for us to allow a spirit of fanaticism to come into our churches, accompanied by strange workings which are incorrectly supposed to be operations of the Spirit of God" (2SM 42 [Letter 338, 1908]).
"Fearful waves of fanaticism will come. But God will deliver the people who will earnestly seek the Lord, and consecrate themselves to His service" (2SM 47 [Pacific Union Recorder, December 31, 1908]).

Music a Problem
"The things you have described as taking place in Indiana, the Lord has shown me would take place just before the close of probation. Every uncouth thing will be demonstrated. There will be shouting, with drums, music, and dancing. The senses of rational beings will become so confused that they cannot be trusted to make right decisions. And this is called the moving of the Holy Spirit" (2SM 36 [Letter 132, 1900]).
"Those things which have been in the past will be in the future. Satan will make music a snare by the way in which it is conducted" (2SM 38 [Letter 132, 1900]).
"Any oddity or peculiarity cultivated attracts the attention of the people and destroys the serious, solemn impression which should be the result of sacred music. Anything strange and eccentric in singing detracts from the seriousness and sacredness of religious service.
"Bodily exercise profiteth little. Everything that is connected in any way with religious worship should be dignified, solemn, and impressive. God is not pleased when ministers professing to be Christ's representatives so misrepresent Christ as to throw the body into acting attitudes, making undignified and coarse gestures, unrefined, coarse gesticulations. All this amuses, and will excite the curiosity of those who wish to see strange, odd, and exciting things, but these things will not elevate the minds and hearts of those who witness them.
"The very same may be said of singing. You assume undignified attitudes. You put in all the power and volume of the voice you can. You drown the finer strains and notes of voices more musical than you own. This bodily exercise and the harsh, loud voice makes no melody to those who hear on earth and those who listen in heaven. This singing is defective and not acceptable to God as perfect, softened, sweet strains of music. There are no such exhibitions among the angels as I have sometimes seen in our meetings. Such harsh notes and gesticulations are not exhibited among the angel choir. Their singing does not grate upon the ear. It is soft and melodious and comes without this great effort I have witnessed. It is not forced and strained, requiring physical exercise" (3SM 333 [MS 5, 1874]).

Satan's Counterfeit in the Church
"It would be surprising if there were not some, who, not being well-balanced in mind, have spoken and acted indiscreetly; for whenever and wherever the Lord works in giving a genuine blessing, a counterfeit is also revealed, in order to make of no effect the true work of God. Therefore we need to be exceeding careful, and walk humbly before God, that we may have spiritual eyesalve that we may distinguish the working of the Holy Spirit of God from the working of that spirit that would bring in wild license and fanaticism. 'By their fruits ye shall know them' (Matt. 7:20). Those who are really beholding Christ will be changed into His image, even by the Spirit of the Lord, and will grow up to the full stature of men and women in Christ Jesus. The Holy Spirit of God will inspire men with love and purity; and refinement will be manifest in their characters" (1SM 142).

Calmness of Spirit's Presence
"Let us give no place to strange exercisings, which really take the mind away from the deep movings of the Holy Spirit. God's work is ever characterized by calmness and dignity" (2SM 42 [Letter 338, 1908]).
"We must go to the people with the solid Word of God; and when they receive that Word, the Holy Spirit may come, but it always comes, as I have stated before, in a way that commends itself to the judgment of the people. In our speaking, our singing, and in all our spiritual exercises, we are to reveal that calmness and dignity and godly fear that actuates every true child of God" (2SM 43 [MS 115, 1908]).
"In God's dealings with His people, all is quiet; with those who trust in Him, all is calm and unpretending" (2SM 97 [Letter 102, 1894]).

Ellen G. White, Selected Mesages, vols. 1, 2, 3 (Review & Herald Pub. Assoc. 1958, 1980)

(Emphasis by underlining has been added by me.)

[saharafan]

SoulEspresso,

Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seemed like your post was intended to close off the possibility of discussing ecstatic speech as a legitimate spiritual experience, by using quotations you gleaned from the writings of Ellen White. Let me respond in two ways. First, with a passage from Mrs. White herself:

Yea, you are wrong, but that’s my fault because obviously my short introductory statement was not clear enough and could easily be misunderstood as it seems… I already apologized for that earlier in this thread and explained how I meant my introductory comment.

While the above quotation doesn't address the issue, it does tell us that just because we've always believed something, or disbelieved something, doesn't make it true or false. Adventists hold to Present Truth, not tradition, which dictates that we must always be re-examining ourselves and engaging in open discussion. It also tells us our primary source of authority is not Ellen White, but the Bible. Ellen White herself says this; I hope that we don't need her permission. She knew she was not infallible.

I fully agree with you on this…

What kind of hurt my feelings is that the comment that preceded the quotations implied that if we all didn't agree that the quotes in question were presently and universally applicable, we don't believe in the Spirit of Prophecy. That's unfair. I believe Ellen White was inspired; I hope I'm right in believing we're to submit her to Scripture, because if not, we've got some major problems we need to address as a church.

I apologize again for not being clear enough and for involuntarily hurting your feelings and those of others.


Now let’s go on to your other disagreement.

I think you are treading on dangerous ground if you let your own personal interpretation of 1 Cor 14, an interpretation which is not unanimously shared among exegetes and theologians within and without our church, decide whether sister White has been wrong in taking her stand against “speaking in tongues”.
Yes, I do believe that those quotes where she speaks about “tongues” that I shared here before can be applied fully and without exception to today’s glossolalia, or ecstatic speech, as commonly practised by Pentecostal Christians. But they don’t necessarily “force” me to understand 1 Cor 14 as referring to intelligible foreign languages, they may help me in my struggle to understand this chapter and give me indications, but mostly they confirm the interpretation that I already find in the text itself as the most likely one.

Many years ago when a student at the Seminary I did a thorough study of 1 Corinthians 14 in the original Greek text; however, this was before I had a computer available and unfortunately my hand-written notes from that textual study are now several thousand kilometres away from my present location. And since I don’t claim to have the biblical “gift of tongues”, my then acquired quite good knowledge of Greek has already forsaken me meanwhile for the most part… So I will try just very briefly to “make up” something and give my reasons why I understand this chapter the way I do.

First, it is certainly correct to replace the references to “tongue(s)” in this chapter with (spoken) “foreign language(s)”, as Inga has suggested. But you should also at the same time read the whole chapter in an older translation like preferably the KJV or the ASV; unfortunately, most modern translations are based on the interpretation of the “tongues” as ecstatic speech or modern day glossolalia, and that comes through in the translations sometimes quite heavily. It might help you a lot to just read the whole chapter in a translation that assumes the “tongues” referring to foreign languages.

There are five relevant passages in the NT about “speaking in tongues”: Mark 16:17; Acts 2:1-13; 10:44-48; 19:1-7; and 1 Corinthians 12-14. In my explanations of them, I will sometimes in some places refer to or quote or paraphrase the excellent book from Dr. Gerhard F. Hasel about “Speaking In Tongues”, published 1994 by the Adventist Theological Society.

1) Marc 16:17: Jesus says that one “sign” ("semeion" in Greek) of the believers would be that they would “speak in new tongues”. This miraculous sign is mentioned in immediate context of the “Great Gospel Commission” in the preceding verses 15 and 16. The “tongues” Jesus predicted are obviously given by the Holy Spirit to enable the disciples to fulfil that Gospel commission. It is a sign just as miraculous as the others mentioned together with it in this verse. Just like them, it was supposed to be a “sign” for the unbelievers that were to be reached and preached to. Paul literally agrees with this in 1 Cor. 14:22, when he says that “tongues are a sign ("semeion") not for believers but for unbelievers.” So its aim is to convince unbelievers of the divine sending of the disciples/apostles/messengers (just like the other signs mentioned there) and enable them to communicate the gospel message to those that would not understand Aramaic and perhaps not even Greek. Therefore, here it clearly refers to intelligible spoken foreign languages.
(To also make the test the other way round, ecstatic utterances would hardly convince any unbeliever that the messenger is sent by the Creator God to him with a solemn message; many heathen religions of that day already knew this kind of glossolalia themselves, so it could never be any clear distinguishing “sign” of the true God, and could never be used to communicate to and reach and convince Gentiles of the message. It just wouldn’t have been any clear “sign”, much lesser a “miracle sign”, it would only have created terrible confusion because of the very similar kind of ecstatic speeches practised by many adherents of different heathen religions.)

2) Acts 2:1-13 is probably the clearest passage about this subject in the Bible and most readers will agree with me anyway so I won’t go too much into detail on this passage. Here it clearly refers to foreign languages spoken by the many Jewish visitors and pilgrims to Jerusalem at the feast. The Holy Spirit gave to the disciples the gift of sudden knowledge of those several languages, and they each started out preaching to a different people group in its respective mother tongue. The indigenous Hebrew Jews didn’t understand what they were saying and were mocking at them, saying there were drunk, and Peter than addresses them and explains that they are not drunk but that this is a sign from God to call people to repentance; it was an example of God pouring out His Spirit upon His true believers just like prophet Joel had prophesised He would do. It was at the same time also supposed to be a "sign of the times" to them, according to Peter's use of the prohpecy of Joel. He then translated/interpreted to them into Aramaic what the others were telling in those foreign languages, calling them to repentance, too. And there was much fruit with many baptisms, as we know.
Unbelieving outsiders visiting the church in Corinth might react similarly like those Hebrews here if they would hear the members in Corinth talk in languages foreign to them and observe the disorderly tongues-speaking meetings there. According to Paul, if the tongues are not understood by the outsider, he may think that the speakers are mad (1 Cor. 14:23). False impressions could arise and the genuine manifestation of speaking foreign languages could be misinterpreted.

Some reasons why the “tongues” here are spoken foreign languages:
a. V. 4: “They … began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” “gave them utterance” is a translation from the Greek verb “apophtheggomai” ; this verb appears only three times in the NT, the two other times being Acts 2:14 and 26:25. In Acts 2:14 (the immediate context!) it is translated with Peter “saying/speaking/proclaiming/declaring/addressing” (to) those Jews that questioned the sanity and soberness of the disciples, “let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say”. What is very interesting here is that this very same Greek verb is used in the very same passage not only for the other disciples talking in foreign languages but also for Peter explaining in Aramaic what is happening to the other disciples and translating them. At the other occurrence in Acts 26:25, it is used in a very similar sense: “I am not mad... but speak forth/utter/say words of truth and soberness/reason.” Paul defends himself that he is not crazy with what he tries to communicate and insists the words he “speaks” ("apophtheggomai") are of truth and soberness.
b. Vv. 6-10: The foreigners were hearing the disciples talking in their own mother tongue. They could recognize the tongue (language) that the disciples were talking in. It was NOT a "hearing miracle" because the gift had come on the disciples and the Hebrew Jews did not understand the foreign languages and thought they were drunk. It was the disciples themselves, on whom the “tongues of fire” had come, who were talking in other languages.
c. V. 11: The foreign visitors declared, “we hear them speaking in our tongues the mighty works of God.” The communication was intelligible, they were “speaking in tongues” about God’s salvation that He offers to the hearers. The tongues were the actual languages of those foreign pilgrims and were clearly understood by them.

3) Acts 10:44-48: Here God gave the same gift of tongues (spoken foreign languages) for two reasons: First to convince the Jewish believers and confirm to them that the Gentile believers were equal to them, that is why they received exactly the same gift, from the same Spirit, who therefore does not reject the Gentiles; and secondly, He gave the same task of evangelism to them as He had given to the Jewish disciples before.
a. The gift of tongues was the proof that the Holy Spirit was/is with those Gentiles as he was/is with themselves (the Jewish disciples). It must therefore be exactly the same kind of gift of “speaking in tongues” as they had received and experienced before in Acts 2, otherwise this wouldn't be any clear sign/proof.
b. Peter (Luke) in verse 47 and in Acts 11:15-18 confirms that it was exactly the same kind of “gift”, therefore the same kind of “speaking in tongues” as in Acts 2.
c. In verse 46, we are told that “they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God”. In the Greek, “speaking” and “magnifying” are both stated as Present Tense Participles, which means that, according to Greek grammar, both things are happening at the same time, therefore, the magnifying/praising/exalting/glorifying of God that the surprised hearers were testifying to was done by/through speaking in tongues, which implies that the “tongues” that they heard were known languages understood by them but until that moment foreign to the Gentiles with Cornelius that the Holy Spirit was giving this gift to.

4) Acts 19:1-7: The same applies to this passage; first there is no indication at all that the “speaking in tongues” in this passage would be anything different from the other occurrences in the Book of Acts so far. If it would be different, we would rightly assume a clarification, or a different definition by Luke. The way it is stated leaves the reader no valid option to understand anything different under this term than in Acts 2 and 10. Secondly also here, “spoke” and “prophesised” are both Imperfect forms in Greek which also indicates simultaneity of action in this close constellation. Again the utterances of those newly baptized believers “speaking in tongues” have to be intelligible languages, to be understood by certain people groups of whom they were the mother tongues.
Ellen White confirms this in “Acts of the Apostles”, p. 283: “They were then baptized in the name of Jesus, and as Paul ‘laid his hands upon them’, they received also the baptism of the Holy Spirit, by witch they were enabled to speak the languages of other nations and to prophesy. Thus they were qualified to labor as missionaries in Ephesus and its vicinity and also go forth to proclaim the gospel in Asia Minor.”
Further it is important to note that here in Ephesus, “speaking in tongues” and “prophesising” are associated with Paul, who in 1 Cor. 14 speaks several times of both. “The link between prophecy and tongues is established by the fact that both are manifestations of the Holy Spirit in Ephesus and Corinth. The close association of tongues and prophecy goes all the way back to the first manifestation of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost where Peter twice referred to prophesying (Acts 2:17,18).” (Hasel, p. 152) It is very interesting that here the “speaking in tongues” as a direct result and proof of the “coming upon them of the Holy Spirit” and commissioning them for mission work as a consequence of Paul putting his hands on the believers should clearly be understood as foreign languages, just as in Acts 2 and 10. Again, note the close connection in this passage between: the manifestation (gift) of the Holy Spirit – Paul – “speaking in tongues” – prophesying; the very same mixture that we find again in 1 Cor. 14. Add to this the fact that Paul wrote this first epistle to the Corinthians at Ephesus (see 1 Cor. 16:8-9), during those very three years there when also that event from Acts 19:1-6 took place. This story, therefore, provides a very strong thematic link between Acts 2 and 1 Cor. 14 concerning the identity of the “speaking in tongues” there, in addition to the textual one of using the same Greek terms throughout the NT for “speaking in tongues”.

So far we have found no indication that the “tongues” would somewhere mean anything different than foreign languages. Stay tuned, I hope to be able to find the time to prepare and post a second part of this short discussion, about 1 Cor. 12-14.

[västergötland]

First, it is certainly correct to replace the references to "tongue(s)" in this chapter with (spoken) "foreign language(s)", as Inga has suggested. But you should also at the same time read the whole chapter in an older translation like preferably the KJV or the ASV; unfortunately, most modern translations are based on the interpretation of the "tongues" as ecstatic speech or modern day glossolalia, and that comes through in the translations sometimes quite heavily. It might help you a lot to just read the whole chapter in a translation that assumes the "tongues" referring to foreign languages.

Unbelieving outsiders visiting the church in Corinth might react similarly like those Hebrews here if they would hear the members in Corinth talk in languages foreign to them and observe the disorderly tongues-speaking meetings there. According to Paul, if the tongues are not understood by the outsider, he may think that the speakers are mad (1 Cor. 14:23). False impressions could arise and the genuine manifestation of speaking foreign languages could be misinterpreted.

How one reacts to foreign languages depends on how acustumed one is to hearing them. In an international port like Corinth, I would be supprised if the people thought speakers of foreign languages where mad. Take New York for example, what language would you have to be speaking for the average New Yorker to consider you mad for the languages sake?

[saharafan]

Before continuing with 1 Corinthians 12-14, I would like to submit two additional thoughts concerning Acts 2 and “speaking in tongues” in general.

First, let’s look what Jesus had to say about the “gift of the Holy Spirit”.

John 15:26,27: “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.”
John 16:7-15: “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: ... 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”

From these passages, I conclude that the “language of the Holy Spirit” is a language, or “tongue”, well understood by and meaningful to those He wants to communicate the divine truths to, the believers who are “filled with the Spirit”. The purpose of the Holy Spirit giving His gifts, especially those related to communication like the gifts of “tongues”, “prophecy”, “teaching”, etc., is to enable and empower believers to “testify” of Jesus, to witness, to proclaim the Good News, to call sinners to repentance and to build up and edify the church. Every true manifestation of the Holy Spirit serves this purpose, and not to create chaos in the church and dissention among the members. This is what Jesus said of what and how the Holy Spirit will “speak”. His communications are always and without exception very meaningful, bearing concrete messages.

Secondly, I would like to quote some selected comments from Ellen White in “Acts of the Apostles” on the Pentecost experience of Acts 2 in confirmation of what I have said so far, especially on this very passage of Acts 2; I would recommend everyone to read the whole chapter 4 for him-/herself. What I especially want to point out is, What has been happening when the Spirit came down on the disciples in the form of tongues of fire? The very moment when they were “touched by the Spirit”, “filled with the Spirit”, when they “yielded to the Spirit”, “gave way to the Spirit”, etc. (all phrases used by Pentecostals to describe their experience of “speaking in tongues”), what has been their response, their behaving, what were the visible manifestations in the disciples, were they also “slain by the Spirit”, were they “laughing in the Spirit”, were they uttering ecstatically unintelligible nonsense gibberish-babbling?

As the disciples waited for the fulfillment of the promise, they humbled their hearts in true repentance and confessed their unbelief. As they called to remembrance the words that Christ had spoken to them before His death they understood more fully their meaning. Truths which had passed from their memory were again brought to their minds, and these they repeated to one another. They reproached themselves for their misapprehension of the Saviour. Like a procession, scene after scene of His wonderful life passed before them. As they meditated upon His pure, holy life they felt that no toil would be too hard, no sacrifice too great, if only they could bear witness in their lives to the loveliness of Christ's character…. And they determined that, so far as possible, they would atone for their unbelief by bravely confessing Him before the world. (p. 36)
The disciples prayed with intense earnestness for a fitness to meet men and in their daily intercourse to speak words that would lead sinners to Christ. Putting away all differences, all desire for the supremacy, they came close together in Christian fellowship. They drew nearer and nearer to God… These days of preparation were days of deep heart searching. The disciples felt their spiritual need and cried to the Lord for the holy unction that was to fit them for the work of soul saving. They did not ask for a blessing for themselves merely. They were weighted with the burden of the salvation of souls. They realized that the gospel was to be carried to the world, and they claimed the power that Christ had promised.
During the patriarchal age the influence of the Holy Spirit had often been revealed in a marked manner, but never in its fullness. Now, in obedience to the word of the Saviour, the disciples offered their supplications for this gift, and in heaven Christ added His intercession. He claimed the gift of the Spirit, that He might pour it upon His people.
"And when the Day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting." (p. 37)
The Spirit came upon the waiting, praying disciples with a fullness that reached every heart. The Infinite One revealed Himself in power to His church. It was as if for ages this influence had been held in restraint, and now Heaven rejoiced in being able to pour out upon the church the riches of the Spirit's grace. And under the influence of the Spirit, words of penitence and confession mingled with songs of praise for sins forgiven. Words of thanksgiving and of prophecy were heard. All heaven bent low to behold and to adore the wisdom of matchless, incomprehensible love. Lost in wonder, the apostles exclaimed, "Herein is love." They grasped the imparted gift. And what followed? The sword of the Spirit, newly edged with power and bathed in the lightnings of heaven, cut its way through unbelief. Thousands were converted in a day. (p.38)
"And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." The Holy Spirit, assuming the form of tongues of fire, rested upon those assembled. This was an emblem of the gift then bestowed on the disciples, which enabled them to speak with fluency languages with which they had heretofore been unacquainted. The appearance of fire signified the fervent zeal with which the apostles would labor and the power that would attend their work. (p.39)
"There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven." During the dispersion the Jews had been scattered to almost every part of the inhabited world, and in their exile they had learned to speak various languages. Many of these Jews were on this occasion in Jerusalem, attending the religious festivals then in progress. Every known tongue was represented by those assembled. This diversity of languages would have been a great hindrance to the proclamation of the gospel; God therefore in a miraculous manner supplied the deficiency of the apostles. The Holy Spirit did for them that which they could not have accomplished for themselves in a lifetime. They could now proclaim the truths of the gospel abroad, speaking with accuracy the languages of those for whom they were laboring. This miraculous gift was a strong evidence to the world that their commission bore the signet of Heaven. From this time forth the language of the disciples was pure, simple, and accurate, whether they spoke in their native tongue or in a foreign language. (pp. 39-40)

Certainly there were emotions present the moment the Holy Spirit was poured out on the disciples, strong, but holy, sanctified emotions. But the way she describes those emotions reminds me very much to the kind of emotions I myself experience and observe in others when participating at a Lord’s Supper celebration (communion worship).
Please note that she agrees with Paul that “tongues are a sign … for the unbelievers” (1 Cor. 14:22), having in mind tongues as foreign languages, that is.
Note also that it wasn't the miraculous manifestation of the Holy Spirit or the speaking in tongues that directly led to the conversion of thousands; it rather was "the sword of the Spirit", which is the Word of God, "newly edged with power and bathed in the lightnings of heaven", i.e. the preaching of Peter and the other disciples in the various languages "as the Spirit gave them utterance"!

--------------------------

Now, given the fact that Paul himself was personally and from personal experience well acquainted with the “original” spiritual gift of speaking in tongues as identified in Acts 2 as intelligible spoken foreign languages, as we have seen in our last passage in Acts 19 in my last post, I wonder whether he actually could possibly integrally refer in 1 Corinthians 12-14 to a completely different spiritual phenomenon (or “manifestation”), using exactly the same term(s) as Luke did in Acts 2; 10; 19, and Marc, Paul’s disciple at one time, in Marc 16, without at the same time making any reference to, or clear distinction from, that “original” gift which he, as shown, knew very well, and which was also well known by the Gentile believers in many places like Ephesus, especially since he himself claims to “speak with tongues more than you all” (1 Cor 14:18), whereas we find outside of 1 Corinthians not even one single evidence for a gift of ecstatic speech like many like to understand the “tongues” in 1 Corinthians, taking also in consideration that Luke, who wrote “Acts” and related to us those events of “speaking in tongues” that we studied so far, using exactly the same terms to describe them as Paul did in 1 Corinthians already years before Luke wrote the book of Acts, was one of the closest associates and travelmates of Paul, which allows us to assume that Luke was probably well acquainted with this epistle of Paul and certainly with the situation in Corinth, from Paul’s sharing with him. That simply doesn’t match in my mind, maybe someone can help me here?…

I hope to finally continue with 1 Corinthians in a further post.

[inga]

How one reacts to foreign languages depends on how acustumed one is to hearing them. In an international port like Corinth, I would be supprised if the people thought speakers of foreign languages where mad. Take New York for example, what language would you have to be speaking for the average New Yorker to consider you mad for the languages sake?

Even in New York, I suspect that folks would tend to think there's something wrong in a church where they heard a number of people all speaking at once in various foreign languages -- even if they were only European languages. (That's what was apparently happening in Corinth. Like I said earlier, they seemed to be a bit of a wild bunch. )

[Clay]

Even in New York, I suspect that folks would tend to think there's something wrong in a church where they heard a number of people all speaking at once in various foreign languages -- even if they were only European languages. (That's what was apparently happening in Corinth. Like I said earlier, they seemed to be a bit of a wild bunch. )

naw.... not if its an apostolic black church, it may be normal..... you all just haven't been exposed to it.....

This post has been edited by Clay: Oct 2 2006, 09:01 AM

[inga]

naw.... not is an apostolic black church, it may be normal..... you all just haven't been exposed to it.....

You're right ... I forgot that nowadays it may seem "normal" in some churches. But it wasn't so in Paul's day.

Otoh, in today's churches they're not speaking many different foreign languages, though to the uninitiated it may well sound just the same.

(I've heard my share. Some of it made my skin crawl and made me very aware of something evil in the room that didn't like us. Other instances seemed quite harmless and I felt quite comfortable analyzing the phenomenon -- whether that was a difference in my mindset or an actual difference I couldn't say for sure, but I think it was an actual difference.)

Let's just change the imaginary New York situation to a board room. What would be the reaction of an invited speaker if he walked into the room and saw all the members standing and talking in different foreign languages??

[västergötland]

You're right ... I forgot that nowadays it may seem "normal" in some churches. But it wasn't so in Paul's day.

Otoh, in today's churches they're not speaking many different foreign languages, though to the uninitiated it may well sound just the same.

(I've heard my share. Some of it made my skin crawl and made me very aware of something evil in the room that didn't like us. Other instances seemed quite harmless and I felt quite comfortable analyzing the phenomenon -- whether that was a difference in my mindset or an actual difference I couldn't say for sure, but I think it was an actual difference.)

Let's just change the imaginary New York situation to a board room. What would be the reaction of an invited speaker if he walked into the room and saw all the members standing and talking in different foreign languages??

How do we know what was normal in Pauls day? There where lots of languages then aswell.
Notice that a language is only foreign to those who are not living where it is mainly spoken. To the great majority of people here Swedish is a foreign language, and to me, stricktly speaking, english is a foreign language.
My point here would be that the existence of a kind of tounges that seem better fit in a movie like the exorcist does not or should not mean that ALL tounges fit that category. Just becourse some people pray to Allah, prayer in itself is not evil. Just becourse one prophecy lead to the Mormon church does not mean that we reject all prophecy. Likewise, just becourse some "unknow tounges" gives us the creeps should not mean that we throw out all of it.
You compare a church to a board room meeting? I hope thats not the ideal comparasion for a church service?

/Thomas

[Richard Sherwin]

Could it be that speaking in tongues is more a case of hearing in tongues? In other words could it be that one person could speak in their own language but it could be heard in several different languages?

In any case it's rather obvious that the gibberish that some speak (and some of us have heard) is not the Biblical speaking in tongues. If it is not from God it can only be from Satan.

Richard

[saharafan]

Could it be that speaking in tongues is more a case of hearing in tongues? In other words could it be that one person could speak in their own language but it could be heard in several different languages?

The biblical references to "speaking in tongues" are very clear as to refer to people gifted by the Spirit actually speaking in foreign languages, this comes especially through in Acts 2, just read my analysis of that passage just a few posts up in this same thread, where I point that out quite clearly. Also Ellen White confirms this very clearly and unambiguously. In none of those references we could see a "miracle of hearing" as you describe it. Always it was the speaker who was extraordinarily or supernaturally gifted by the Holy Spirit, not the hearer. And in the instances mentioned in the book of Acts, it always clearly was a suddenly bestowed gift, they suddenly could talk perfectly in foreign languages without having learned them before at all, and that gift usually remained with them in the long term and was permanent.
There are some very rare incidences of God giving this true biblical "gift of speaking in tongues" even today or in the last few centuries in mission history, I believe.
However, today you will find much more often that kind of "hearing miracle" that you were refering to, in order to reach people with the message at one time, and some posters here described some exemplary occurances here in this very thread. However, this is not a "gift" of the spirit, it is simply a one time miracle to reach a certain person, or group of persons, at a certain place in a certain moment with a specific message.

In any case it's rather obvious that the gibberish that some speak (and some of us have heard) is not the Biblical speaking in tongues. If it is not from God it can only be from Satan.

I believe there is another third option - that is that most of the time the ecstatic speech, or glossolalia, as performed by todays Pentecostal believers for example, is basically a mere psychological phenomenon, without any necessary supernatural influences. However, as one of its advocates pointed out correctly here in this thread, those practising it are in a psychological condition where they are "spiritually receptive", and unfortunately this does well imply receptiveness for demonic spirits. Since the mind is kind of "shut down", or at least much lesser active as the emotions take over control, one usually won't be able to reckognize the demonic origin of a supernatural spirit that touches and filles them when in such a condition of ecstasy, or trance. That is why people performing it can actually become possessed when doing so.
I believe, what makes the difference between people becoming possessed and those who don't, is their personal relationship with Jesus and their personal devotion to Him; whether they live according to their conscious, to their perhaps misguided understanding of God's law and the Bible but devoted to the Bible and to Jesus, and humbling themselves before Him.
As others have mentioned alraedy, I too belive God is simply protecting those really belonging to Him and performing this ecstatic speech, although God is not at all happy with them doing so, I believe. But as long as the Bible remains the basis for faith and their relationship with God and the ecstatic speech is only something additional but not the main thing defining and controlling their relationship with God, the devil has much lesser power to influence them during the performance of the ecstatic speech because God simply blocks him from doing so because His beloved children do this simply in ignorance.
If they lose their close connection with God and put more emphasis on emotions, it might become very dangerous for them to be deceived even more and become possessed without realizing it, believing it is the Holy Spirit of God that is guiding them, talking to them, giving them visions and dreams, and making them "feel good".
However, in a certain sense, you are right and glossolalia is always from Satan: in the sense of being a dangerous deception to reach true believers and make them dependent on emotional highs for their religion and gradually deceiving them more, step by step. It is that idea or plan of leading believers to self-induced ecstatical highs where they will be "spiritually receptive" for more direct demonic influence, if God permits it, which is from Satan.

[princessdi]

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned". Mercy! This is just sad!

[saharafan]

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned". Mercy! This is just sad!

You are certainly right, "spiritual things need to be spiritually discerned", and not emotionally.
And for discerning something we need a certain and trustworthy basis, a dependable rule, on that we can discern, or judge, or examine something. And in order to discern/judge/examine/evaluate/investigate spiritual things, that basis has to be the Bible, which is spiritual and was inspired by the Holy Spirit. If our understanding of some "spiritual things" does not comply with the Bible, we are already wrong, or misguided, or deceived concerning that point, and perhaps in spiritual danger, depending on the importance of the matter.

And that is exactly what I am doing here, I judge glossolalia by the Bible.

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

This talks about the Word of God (the spiritual tuth or message preached by the apostles and prophets). Today this is the Bible. It has to be understood "spiritually", i.e. with the help and ilumination of the Holy Spirit. Once it is understood this way and has become accepted truth, it is the basis for discering any other "spiritual thing."

"He that is spiritual" who judgeth all things is he that is devoted to biblical truth, has a living personal relationship with God based on biblical truth, teachings and principles and desires for the Holy Spirit to guide and illuminate him through biblical truth, i.e. through the Bible. Then God will also give him understanding in spiritual matters where the Bible and Ellen White are not clear. Concerning glossolalia, I believe both of those "spiritual sources" are clear and in harmony.

This post has been edited by saharafan: Oct 2 2006, 07:28 AM