Evidence for God from Science

Honestly, I really don't have any gripe with what people do in their private prayer life regarding the issue of tongues.

One will find little to nothing in the scriptures when it comes to establishing any sound doctrine in regards to prayer tongues. Arriving at this requires a very shaky handling of the scriptures and IMO, is more indicative of one reading their theology into the text, as opposed to having their theology shaped by the text. It requires proof-texting and ignoring context. But, that is rarely what is at controversy here. Public use of what we call tongues is what the debate it about, and always will be.

jlay wrote:Secret,

Agree 100%. Many forget that the entire context of this section of 1 Cor. is a rebuke and correction. Paul crafted his words in a way that in one sense was to exhibit gentleness to the fragile Corinthian church. But, I think this leads many to think he is endorsing something, when in fact he is not.

If you wrote down any of the stuff you did from this project, I'd love to read.

Thanks

hi and thanks, yes i did write alot of it down in an e-mail project to a bible study group. unfortunately i never heard any feedback or if they even got it. I'm not sure if I have any of the e-mail saved anywhere, I'm guessing I don't as it was about a year ago when I finished the study. The only thing I have in writting for sure is a couple papers that a pastor who supports the charismatic use of tounges gave to me and a few notes I wrote down here and there. If you have specific questions about it I'm sure I could answer them

FearlessLlearsy wrote:My mother often speaks in tongue... alone in her bedroom when she is praying. I suppose in that case, it is not self- edifinement? or however you spell that

nah, God would be listening to her heart in that prayer rather than the sounds she makes, so her prayers are good prayers. it would be the same as how God would hear the prayers of a mute, deaf, or any person who was unable to speak. What Paul was talking about with the self edification would be if someone was in a congragation that only spoke english and stood up and gave a prayer or message in Turkish. They understand so it uplifts them, God understands because he knows all human languages, but for everyone else it was just a waste of time UNLESS it is translated to them.

I have heard of times where people actually translated a message that was given in "tongues" by someone. There are some documented cases, but i cant really find any on the net,

I have seem some cases translated and most of them was a rebuke or prophecy from God, some of them even turned out to be as predicted. I haven't translated any tongues my self but do know about 3 different I speak. Some very good friends of mine have this gift but the translation is not always done. i think it is because most of the time it is just heart to heart with God

I've read 2 reports from linguistics experts who have been studying the phenomena of tongues all over the world as far back as the 60's. These were not associated with any religious groups so there would be no bias for or against the practice, which is why I used them in my own research. This is a synopsis of what they found:
1. All spoken language has a flow, pattern and specific syntax no matter where on the planet it is from. All studies of the tongues phenomena of every country and every religion that use it found no pattern, no syntax and the sounds were completely random. This is a huge red flag for anyone who studies languages as it usually points to the language being a fake. Even encrypted or coded language has to follow these characteristics
2. All people practicing their religion's spiritual tongue will make sounds and syllables from their native language. In other words an english speaker will ramble off english sounds (da, la, be, de, sha, con, no) and a spanish speaker will ramble off spanish sounds and syllables and a Korean speaker will ramble Korean sounds (rolling 'r', nasaly 'g' or some which i can't write out understandibly). Basically they can only mimic the sounds they have been exposed to and know how to make. This is red flag #2 because if God or any other spirit is speaking through people in a universal heavenly language like they believe they do, then it would all use the same sounds and syllables no matter what you speak natively.
3. Sounds even differ from congregation to congregation. For example the tongues of a Pentacostal church in Texas, will sound different from a Pentecostal church in New Jersey. They will also have the same interpretation for different tongue expressions. John 3:16 is the most common verse given in the spiritual tounges arena, buts it's never the same in sounds or duration. Red flag #3 pops up because this means there is no consistency. Any sound can mean anything at any time.
The data led them to the conclusion that ALL of these religious spiritual tongues were not true languages of any kind. Combine that with flag #4, which is that this practice has been around since at least ancient Egypt and only entered into christianity in 20th century America, was just another nail in it's coffin for me.

I found those studies on the net, probably by Google and sifting through many many sites. Trying to find one that wasn't associated with or funded by a religious orginization was the hard part. I just now did another quick search and found a ton of sites and links talking about how the speech part of your brain is not firing when someone prays or gives a message in the spirit. Duh, they aren't saying anything so of course the complex brain functions of forming ideas and sentences wont fire. It would be the same as if you were screaming, crying, laughing or coughing. I did find one of the sites I read when doing my study and really liked it. it's religious based, but it's very level headed, logical, uses scripture and history to hopefully open more eyes about what is going on out there.

http://www.speaking-in-tongues.net/

enjoy

here is a new one i just found. says all the same things as the other two but is not as old http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/mueller ... alysis.pdf

1. All spoken language has a flow, pattern and specific syntax no matter where on the planet it is from. All studies of the tongues phenomena of every country and every religion that use it found no pattern, no syntax and the sounds were completely random. This is a huge red flag for anyone who studies languages as it usually points to the language being a fake. Even encrypted or coded language has to follow these characteristics
2. All people practicing their religion's spiritual tongue will make sounds and syllables from their native language. In other words an english speaker will ramble off english sounds (da, la, be, de, sha, con, no) and a spanish speaker will ramble off spanish sounds and syllables and a Korean speaker will ramble Korean sounds (rolling 'r', nasaly 'g' or some which i can't write out understandibly). Basically they can only mimic the sounds they have been exposed to and know how to make. This is red flag #2 because if God or any other spirit is speaking through people in a universal heavenly language like they believe they do, then it would all use the same sounds and syllables no matter what you speak natively.
3. Sounds even differ from congregation to congregation. For example the tongues of a Pentacostal church in Texas, will sound different from a Pentecostal church in New Jersey. They will also have the same interpretation for different tongue expressions. John 3:16 is the most common verse given in the spiritual tounges arena, buts it's never the same in sounds or duration. Red flag #3 pops up because this means there is no consistency. Any sound can mean anything at any time.
The data led them to the conclusion that ALL of these religious spiritual tongues were not true languages of any kind. Combine that with flag #4, which is that this practice has been around since at least ancient Egypt and only entered into christianity in 20th century America, was just another nail in it's coffin for me.

That is very insightful but it is nothing new, it is understood, you will only make noises or sounds that you are familiar with and that is the point isn't it? That is why the speaker never understands.

I once asked my Bible College professor "Does the gift of translation of tongues demands as a pre-requisite that one must speak tongues as well?"

he said yes

But then I asked him "Wouldn't that make the gift of translation null and void cuz that way anyone who can speak tongues may well in time be able to decipher it."

he said that translation comes from divine revelation, in essence you do not understand what others are saying, you ask God to reveal it to you. so even if someone knows how to speak tongues, he still needs HS to reveal to him what it really means.

So if tongues can not be regarded as a language then it makes perfect sense, there is no pattern, only God can show you what it really means. to the very next person if it sounds as screaming or crying or equivalent, it would make no difference, just like a infant who only cries, but their mothers still know whether they are hungry or they need pampering - although no words are ever clear.

But I do agree, a lot of times people fake it too.

neo-x wrote:

1. All spoken language has a flow, pattern and specific syntax no matter where on the planet it is from. All studies of the tongues phenomena of every country and every religion that use it found no pattern, no syntax and the sounds were completely random. This is a huge red flag for anyone who studies languages as it usually points to the language being a fake. Even encrypted or coded language has to follow these characteristics
2. All people practicing their religion's spiritual tongue will make sounds and syllables from their native language. In other words an english speaker will ramble off english sounds (da, la, be, de, sha, con, no) and a spanish speaker will ramble off spanish sounds and syllables and a Korean speaker will ramble Korean sounds (rolling 'r', nasaly 'g' or some which i can't write out understandibly). Basically they can only mimic the sounds they have been exposed to and know how to make. This is red flag #2 because if God or any other spirit is speaking through people in a universal heavenly language like they believe they do, then it would all use the same sounds and syllables no matter what you speak natively.
3. Sounds even differ from congregation to congregation. For example the tongues of a Pentacostal church in Texas, will sound different from a Pentecostal church in New Jersey. They will also have the same interpretation for different tongue expressions. John 3:16 is the most common verse given in the spiritual tounges arena, buts it's never the same in sounds or duration. Red flag #3 pops up because this means there is no consistency. Any sound can mean anything at any time.
The data led them to the conclusion that ALL of these religious spiritual tongues were not true languages of any kind. Combine that with flag #4, which is that this practice has been around since at least ancient Egypt and only entered into christianity in 20th century America, was just another nail in it's coffin for me.

That is very insightful but it is nothing new, it is understood, you will only make noises or sounds that you are familiar with and that is the point isn't it? That is why the speaker never understands.

I once asked my Bible College professor "Does the gift of translation of tongues demands as a pre-requisite that one must speak tongues as well?"

he said yes

But then I asked him "Wouldn't that make the gift of translation null and void cuz that way anyone who can speak tongues may well in time be able to decipher it."

he said that translation comes from divine revelation, in essence you do not understand what others are saying, you ask God to reveal it to you. so even if someone knows how to speak tongues, he still needs HS to reveal to him what it really means.

So if tongues can not be regarded as a language then it makes perfect sense, there is no pattern, only God can show you what it really means. to the very next person if it sounds as screaming or crying or equivalent, it would make no difference, just like a infant who only cries, but their mothers still know whether they are hungry or they need pampering - although no words are ever clear.

But I do agree, a lot of times people fake it too.

I see, but i would have taken it a step further with that professor and asked why make any sounds or noises in the first place? If they actually mean nothing and are not universal and dont represent language or information at all, why bother with it? If you must ask the Holy Spirit to reveal what the message was, then he must repeat it to you in a way you could understand anyway, like your native language. You would also be saying that nobody, including the speaker, understood what was said and this is in sharp contrast to what is in the scripture where there was always Somebody who could recognize, understand and be awe struck. i'll be honest tho, I don't know the Bible front to back, but I don't ever recall of a time when a message to prophets or any disciple was given in the way of the modern tongues practice. I remember visions, dreams and direct speaking in the persons native tongue.
I do disagree with the infant cry analogy. Neither a mother or a father knows what they need just from cries. It takes trial and error and experience to learn why an infant might be crying at a certain moment. A baby cry just means something is wrong (hungry, in pain, poopy, alone and scared, etc.)

I've found that this whole confusion about tongues came from modern misunderstanding about the old english version of the Bible. When we see the word tongues, we think of the fleshy things in our mouths and a supernatural phenomenon of spiritual voice. When other parts of the world or people of long ago see the word tongues, they think of the fleshy thing in our mouths and speaking foreign languages of another country. When we see the word interpretation we think of giving someone the jist of a statement or our version of a story, but not knowing if we are 100% accurate. When the folks of olden day England saw the word interpretation, they think of translating foreign languages and are more or less 100% accurate. So in reality its not the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation, it's the gift of foreign language and the gift of translation. Reading ACTS and CORINTHIANS with this true understanding makes it 50 times clearer about what the gift is and totally exposes the flaws in the charismatic doctrine.

Please belive me that im not trying to be mean or nasty. up until a few months ago i attended the assemblies of God church every week. I discovered some issues and voiced my concerns. They wouldn't or couldn't back up their beliefs, so i did my own investigation and found it to be just another niche offshoot of Christianity with its own system and own practices and its just not for me. Don't get me wrong, the people I met there are awesome and are no doubt God's own and I will go back and visit time to time and if they ever needed me for anything I'd surely help out. I just can't allow myself to settle for something that isnt Biblical.

I would encourage everyone to do their own investigation into it. anylize the orginal languages and what the words really mean. investigate the origin of the Bible versions they use in their churches, look into the other cultures and religions that practice it, check it's history..who made it, when, where and why. Most importantly make sure you have at least some unbiased people and sources to help you.

I think we are talking the same thing and have the same concerns, in that I find your conclusions exactly like mine. My first impression was that you were saying that such a thing as this gift does not exist at all. I'm sorry i see your point now.

Please belive me that im not trying to be mean or nasty. up until a few months ago i attended the assemblies of God church every week. I discovered some issues and voiced my concerns. They wouldn't or couldn't back up their beliefs, so i did my own investigation and found it to be just another niche offshoot of Christianity with its own system and own practices and its just not for me. Don't get me wrong, the people I met there are awesome and are no doubt God's own and I will go back and visit time to time and if they ever needed me for anything I'd surely help out. I just can't allow myself to settle for something that isnt Biblical.

I do believe you bro, most people are honest but at the same time have not thought about in detail about such issues, they just take it as taught/preached. I also think that one must have his own experience applied to the situation before weighing the final conclusion.

So in reality its not the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation, it's the gift of foreign language and the gift of translation. Reading ACTS and CORINTHIANS with this true understanding makes it 50 times clearer about what the gift is and totally exposes the flaws in the charismatic doctrine.

I have witnessed something like this and again I would confirm with your observations. A lot of Christian scholars agree with this, and personally I think it may very well be true. And yes there are a lot of flawed doctrines that are being taught or preached these days, even by larger churches and denominations and yes when you would question them they would come up with silly answers that wouldn't even makes sense, I was actually expelled from my church for asking such questions. One point they stressed was that every person who receives the Holy spirit can only be validated by the speaking of tongues, something that I do not agree with and the Bible does not teach. The Bible says the HS gives to everyone a gift according to his own will. This and a lot of self made doctrines finally resulted in me leaving them.

I would encourage everyone to do their own investigation into it. anylize the orginal languages and what the words really mean. investigate the origin of the Bible versions they use in their churches, look into the other cultures and religions that practice it, check it's history..who made it, when, where and why. Most importantly make sure you have at least some unbiased people and sources to help you.

That is the best thing that we can teach people who are actively searching for God.

WOW they kicked you out!!?? Honestly it just amazes me how many official churches read the Bible, but don't acctually read the Bible. I would have pointed out to them that the Bible clearly teaches that the FRUITS of the spirit are the one and only way to know who has it and who doesn't..NOT the gifts. What is that verse where Jesus says that people will be comming to him saying "lord lord, have we not performed miracles in your name and cast out demons in your name?" And Jesus will tell them to get away from him and calls them hypocrytes or something like that. Sounds like that church, they perform the "miracle of tongues" in his name, but they are bearing no fruit if they kick you out for questioning them.

I was teaching at their Bible college (also member of the church) and I didn't follow what material they gave me to teach, because it was non-biblical. I also asked them questions and over some months they began to tell me indirectly that I have a great future in Christ and that I should look for better opportunities to the point that one day the head pastor sat down with me and told me either I have to leave me thoughts out or leave the church. And here is the kicker I was teaching for free, I wasn't taking a dime and I had been teaching for 5 years and I told them that let me teach, I will teach for free for the next ten years as well but they just wouldn't have it.

I agree with those that have interpreted speakings in tongues with being able to speak and translate languages that one has no experience/knowledge of.
Seems to be the most natural and correct way of reading that passage in ACTS.
The point that angelic language is also spoken by those that speak in tongues is an interesting one.
Why would the HS give the gift of angelic language to a person that is speaking to people that are NOT "angels"?
Unless one has been commisioned bY Christ to preach to the angels it seems like a "useless" gift and the HS doesn't bless us with useless gifts.

Unless one has been commisioned bY Christ to preach to the angels it seems like a "useless" gift and the HS doesn't bless us with useless gifts.

unless its a prophecy

well it depends on who you ask what the angelic language is supposed to be for. most will just say it's an extra special way to get closer to God. I've been told everyone can do it if they want to, if their faith is strong and if they practice it enough, but this would be in direct opposition to Pauls message in first Corinthians where he explains that not all believers will be given every gift, that there is variety and purpose for that variety. he also says it's the least of the gifts. i take that as least useful and therefore would be least used.

I've been told by a different group that it is used to sneak prayers past Satan because he doesn't know this language and then cannot interfere with what you're praying for. They must have forgotton who Satan is...an ANGEL. he would be able to understand everything in an angelic language if it existed. Also, Satan can read your thoughts and your heart just like God does. thats how he knows what temptations we would be weak against.

the last group says that it isn't you praying or speaking at all, but it's the Holy Spirit that has taken over your tounge/body and makes you do things. Sometimes you can't resist or even remember when it happens. Can anyone spot the flaw with this idea?? it's a big one...