Brain Scan Study on Glossalia

[Daniel_Marsh]

Brain Scan Study on Glossalia in the News
Monday, November 06, 2006

Scientists at the University of Pennsylvania say they have captured glossalia (speaking in tongues) on brain scans, which link decreased frontal lobe activity to a loss of self control.

publicparapsychology.blogspot.com/2006/11/brain-scan-study-on-glossalia-in-news.html

Last week, the New York Times reported that neuroscientists had gotten a look, for the first time, at the brains of devout Christians engaged in speaking in tongues. The test subjects believe that God takes possession of their minds and babbles through their mouths. And now, says the Times, “they have some neuroscience to back them up.”

The scientists compared the brain activity of their subjects in two conditions—first while they sang gospel songs, and second as they engaged in trancelike glossolalia replete with ecstatic bodily experiences. According to the research report, they found diminished activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which normally lights up when you’re doing something on purpose. “The amazing thing was how the images supported people’s interpretations of what was happening,” the study’s lead author, Andrew Newberg, told the Times. If the test subjects said they were in a state of utter abandon, the pictures of their brains proved it

slate.com/id/2153947/
slate.com/id/2165026/

However, past linquistic, psychological studies have determined that there is no discernable language patern among the speech of glossolalics. Linquists have studied tape recordings and live session of those who speak in tongues, and no one to my knowledge has ever documented any of us modern tongue speakers as speaking a human language, not one. They have also used recorded messages of know human languages and presented them to those who have the gift of interpretation, and not one of those interpretaters have even come close to the correct interpretation of the tape recordings, not one. So, it makes sense that the communication part of the brain is not engaged because we are simply not speaking a language – not even a good immitation of one.

List of research on this that you can find via WorldCat:

Theology and Psychology of Glossolalia by Heliodra Emma Gonsalvez

Internal-external locus of control in glossolalics by Coulson, Jesse E.

A comparative study of the responses of glossolalics and non-glossolalics to a stress awareness seminar by Lee, William Franklin

A psycho-political comparison of hallucinatory phenomena amongst schizophrenics, LSD-users and glossolalics by Baker, Cheryl Diane.

The manifest personality needs of glossolalics and non-glossolalics in Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal churches by Allen, Charles B.

The psychology of speaking in tongues, by Kildahl, John P.

Glossolalia and mental health final progress report by
Kildahl, John P.; Qualben, Paul A.

Glossolalia a psychological evaluation by Lester, Andrew D.

MMPI profiles of glossolalists : a comparison by Morrow, Debra K.

Electroencephalographic correlates of glossolalic Christian prayer by Jones, Timothy Arthur

Exploration of state and trait personality characteristics among religious glossolalics by Johnson, Beth A.

Personality correlates of glossolalia as a function of frequency, type, and religious orientation by Swaggerty, G. Matthew.

Glossolalia findings from the social behavioral sciences by Malony, H. Newton

Glossolalia : the personality correlates of conventional and unconventional subgroups by Smith, Daniel Stephen

Debunking Some of the Myths About Glossolalia by H. Newton Malony

In Him

Daniel Marsh

 

[Legal_Eagle]

And your point is…?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

My point starts with the word “However” in the my post.

Basically, tongue speakers will claim that their mind is not engaged because God has taken over their mouths. I think their mind is not engaged because they are Not communicating peroid.

The linquistic research on tongues is straghtforward, the tongue speakers are NOT speaking a language. What they are babbling is gribish, peroid. It does not in anyway resemble a human language, no language structures, nothing but noise. If you read Acts 2 you will find that the apostles and the church were speaking known human languages.

I listed the studies from the past that documents and backs up my claims that come after the word, “however” above.

About the author of the research

andrewnewberg.com/bio.asp
andrewnewberg.com/pub.asp

andrewnewberg.com/

The mystical mind :
probing the biology of religious experience /
Eugene G D’Aquili; Andrew B Newberg

Why God won’t go away :
brain science and the biology of belief /
Andrew B Newberg; Eugene G D’Aquili; Vince Rause

Why we believe what we believe :
uncovering our biological need for meaning, spirituality, and truth /
Andrew B Newberg; Mark Robert Waldman
**
Do you remember events differently from how they really happened? Where do your superstitions come from? How do morals evolve? Why are some people religious and others nonreligious? Everyone has thoughts and questions like these, and now psychologists Newberg and Waldman show, for the first time, how our complex views emerge from the neural activities of the brain…**

 

[gocatholic]

I think this sort of conversation is important. It is my understanding that this topic was brought up during the Vatican II council. It is also my understanding that as of now, the Church is not taking an official position on glossolalia. I tend to believe that it is actually a mockery of God, but I submit to the Church in being open-minded about it until more is discussed on the matter. If I am incorrect about the Church’s position on this I would appreciate correction.

GoCatholic

 

[Allweather]

My understanding is that there is more than one type of manifestation of tongues, and I believe the NT bears this out. By far the most common is what I have heard called (and do call myself) the personal prayer language. This is certainly NOT a human language, and is probably just a bunch of gibberish, as Dan says. Personally, I don’t think there is anything particularly spiritual about it. I don’t see it as something that God gifts over. It is merely a release from the dependence upon the spoken or mind language and allowing the Holy Spirit to inspire the subjects of prayer. It isn’t necessarily spoken aloud. Mostly, for me, it isn’t aloud, or else it is just a quiet movement of my mouth that can’t be discerned by anyone else but me. Scripture says the Holy Spirit knows what we’re supposed to be praying for, and sometimes this pass through the mind as I speak in my prayer language.

I don’t think there is anything “wrong” with this, it is perfectly harmless, and totally unnecessarily. It is simply a habit I developed back when I was hanging around pentecostals and charismatics.

The type of tongues mentioned in Acts 2 is a completely different type of tongues, and is truly miraculous, and very, very rare.

 

[mercygate]

A Pentecostal minister friend of mine refers to what is described in these articles as the sub-category of speaking in tongues called “ecstatic utterance.”

 

[LilyM]

What about the gift of tongues that St Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 12:10 though? He pairs it with the gift of interpretation of tongues (unnecessary if the speakers are using ordinary human language).

I believe this, combined with his mention of the ‘inexpressible groans and sighings’ with which the Spirit speaks at times, indicates glossolalia.

Not that every instance of glossolalia is either genuine or Holy Spirit-inspired, but then again neither is every self-styled ‘prophet’ or ‘prophecy’ either. But i wouldn’t discount that at least some such experiences are genuine.

 

[RobNY]

The linquistic research on tongues is straghtforward, the tongue speakers are NOT speaking a language. What they are babbling is gribish, peroid. It does not in anyway resemble a human language, no language structures, nothing but noise. If you read Acts 2 you will find that the apostles and the church were speaking known human languages.

Apparently. vv. 7-8 say,“Are not all these people who are speaking Galileans? Then how does each of us hear them in his own native language?”

But the emphasis must be put on, “hear.” This is because other scoff that, “They have had too much new wine” (v. 13). So it can be seen that the miracle is working on the hearing of the crowd, especially-- for whatever reason some had the grace to understand and others did not, their hearts were hard and they thought they were drunk. As Peter apologizes, " These people are not drunk, as you suppose" (v. 15).

It would seem to me that this is consistent with Paul’s presentation, for he speaks of tongues as if people cannot understand them, e.g., 1 Cor 14:2, and he enjoins people to only speak in tongues publicly if there is someone to interpret (v. 13).

Not ironically, Paul says, “if I pray in a tongue my spirit is at prayer, but my mind is unproductive” (v. 14).

Now, while it might be easy to cast doubt on whether tongues are genuine because these peoples minds are totally at rest, theolgically, it seems to me to make perfect sense that one passively receiving a gift of God would be at rest as God works on them.

Regardless, speaking in instruction is obviously more valuable than tongues (v. 19).

The only thing I really differ from you on is that in Acts 2 glossolalia is primarily speaking in another language, for it seems that to some it was their personal language, and to others it was gibberish such that the apostles seemed drunk. The language seems to be more in the hearing, than in the speaking (i.e., no speech patterns would have been detectable) making this a rather peculiar miracle.

-Rob

 

[Pixie_Dust]

The type of tongues mentioned in Acts 2 is a completely different type of tongues, and is truly miraculous, and very, very rare.

I know a woman who is a 1st generation American. Her parents came from Germany. She grew up learning to speak only English. When she was 5 years old, they went back to Germany to visit family. She has vivid memories of her German-speaking grandmother telling her about Jesus (she understood her in English) and her grandmother told the girl’s mother that she (the girl who knew only English) was speaking to her in German whenever no one else was in the room with them. THAT, IMNSHO, is a true Acts 2 kind of miracle.

 

[Allweather]

I know a woman who is a 1st generation American. Her parents came from Germany. She grew up learning to speak only English. When she was 5 years old, they went back to Germany to visit family. She has vivid memories of her German-speaking grandmother telling her about Jesus (she understood her in English) and her grandmother told the girl’s mother that she (the girl who knew only English) was speaking to her in German whenever no one else was in the room with them. THAT, IMNSHO, is a true Acts 2 kind of miracle.

I believe it! I’ve heard dozens of testimonies from people who told stories very similar to this, where a momentary gift of understanding, or speaking in an unknown foreign language was given for a purpose. I used to listen to programs by a guy named Harald Bredesen, who I think was, or is if he’s still living, a Lutheran of some type. He told stories of things like this happening to him.

I have also witnessed quite a few messages given (in a church setting) in a beautiful but unknown tongue, followed a moment later by a “translation” of it from another person in English. I suppose these could have been staged, but knowing those people as I did, I seriously doubt them to be capable of such deception. These messages were never very important, or memorable, rather consisting of words of encouragement.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Daniel Marsh:

The linquistic research on tongues is straghtforward, the tongue speakers are NOT speaking a language.

Um… no.

There are different kinds of tongues. The gift of tongues is speaking in a language unknown to the speaker. As with all of the gifts of the Spirit, the gift is meant to communicate something from the Holy Spirit through the communicant to another person. These communications must be discerned by someone with the gift of Knowledge.

Speaking in tongues, praying in tongues, and singing in tongues are not like the gift of tongues. These latter phenomena are between the Holy Spirit and the communicant only.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

The greek word for “tongue” plainly means Language.

Acts 2, the miracles was that they were speaking the different human languages that they did not learn, thus the need for an interpretator in church.

Acts 2:1-12 (The Message)

A Sound Like a Strong Wind

1-4 When the Feast of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Without warning there was a sound like a strong wind, gale force—no one could tell where it came from. It filled the whole building. Then, like a wildfire, the Holy Spirit spread through their ranks, and they started speaking in a number of different languages as the Spirit prompted them.
5-11There were many Jews staying in Jerusalem just then, devout pilgrims from all over the world. When they heard the sound, they came on the run. Then when they heard, one after another, their own mother tongues being spoken, they were thunderstruck. They couldn’t for the life of them figure out what was going on, and kept saying, "Aren’t these all Galileans? How come we’re hearing them talk in our various mother tongues?

Parthians, Medes, and Elamites;
Visitors from Mesopotamia, Judea, and Cappadocia,
Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia,
Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene;
Immigrants from Rome, both Jews and proselytes;
Even Cretans and Arabs!
“They’re speaking our languages, describing God’s mighty works!”

12Their heads were spinning; they couldn’t make head or tail of any of it. They talked back and forth, confused: “What’s going on here?”

I Cor 12-14 uses the same greek word thoughout for languages, tongues.

Yes, there are different uses of the spiritual gift of tongues.

Prayer language, only to be spoken in private, not in public worship.

Worship language, to deliver an message, prophecy, word of knowledge to the congregation, but done in good order, not in confusion.

Missionary language, like in Acts 2, where one is witnessing to someone of a different language in their language.

I Cor 14:28 is clear, if there is no interpretator in public worship, the gift of tongues is NOT to be employed. Based, on I cor 14 only one person at a time is to speak in tongues, taking turns. This is based on the order of worship in the temple of that day, where scripture was read by various readers, each taking their turn. It is in this context that Jesus read from Isaiah one day in the Temple and said that that text was fulfilled in their midst.

 

[guanophore]

the Church is not taking an official position on glossolalia. I tend to believe that it is actually a mockery of God,
GoCatholic

I am surprised at this. What makes you say so?

 

[guanophore]

The linquistic research on tongues is straghtforward, the tongue speakers are NOT speaking a language. What they are babbling is gribish, peroid. It does not in anyway resemble a human language, no language structures, nothing but noise.

This is a human centered perspective. Yes, the language may not be one that is recognizeable in our day and age, or to linguists, but that does not mean it is not language, or that it is babbling or gibberish. This judgement reflects a self centered and narrow minded approach to language. There are many forms of language that are not recognizeable to linguists (found prominently throughout the animal kingdom).

1 Cor 13:1
13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal."

Paul clearly states that some of these are the “tongues of angels”. A heavenly language that flows through the believer when love is present.

Rom 8:26-27

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. 27 And he who searches the hearts of men knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."

In this case, the believer yields himself to God, and allows the Spirit to pray through them, using a heavenly language.

1 Cor 14:1-2
2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit."

Paul teaches us that one who speaks in a tongue utters mysteries in the Spirit. Even the one praying may not know what he prays. This is such a sacred experience, and the reason I was surprised that gocatholic said it is a mockery of God.

 

[VociMike]

Um… no.

There are different kinds of tongues. The gift of tongues is speaking in a language unknown to the speaker. As with all of the gifts of the Spirit, the gift is meant to communicate something from the Holy Spirit through the communicant to another person. These communications must be discerned by someone with the gift of Knowledge.

Speaking in tongues, praying in tongues, and singing in tongues are not like the gift of tongues. These latter phenomena are between the Holy Spirit and the communicant only.

I guess the obvious question to ask is, how often these days do people actually speak in human languages that they do not know, and which are understood by nearby listeners?

In the Early Church there were both kinds of tongues. Are there still both kinds today, and if so, in what proportions?

 

[guanophore]

I guess the obvious question to ask is, how often these days do people actually speak in human languages that they do not know, and which are understood by nearby listeners?

In the Early Church there were both kinds of tongues. Are there still both kinds today, and if so, in what proportions?

I would say that it happens as often as the HS desires! I think it would the happen more if faithful were willing to yield.

I also think there are more than just these two types. The tongues described in Corinthians to be used during public worship with an interpretation are different from that manifestation that occurred when Peter was preaching, and are also different from those in the private prayer language. Scripture speaks of “various” kinds of tongues, so there may be more.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

This is a human centered perspective. Yes, the language may not be one that is recognizeable in our day and age, or to linguists, but that does not mean it is not language, or that it is babbling or gibberish. This judgement reflects a self centered and narrow minded approach to language. There are many forms of language that are not recognizeable to linguists (found prominently throughout the animal kingdom).

Even if it was an language that a linquist did not know, there would be discernable language patterns, no such patterns exist among “tongue” speakers. In fact, linquists have played tapes of foriegn language messages to those who claim to have the gift of interpretation, and NOT ONCE have any of those interpretators even come close to the correct translation of the message.

1 Cor 13:1
13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal."

Paul clearly states that some of these are the “tongues of angels”. A heavenly language that flows through the believer when love is present.

Paul is using exageration there. In fact, Paul was exposed to “angelic language” II cor 12, and could not relay it out of his own mouth.

Rom 8:26-27

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. 27 And he who searches the hearts of men knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."

In this case, the believer yields himself to God, and allows the Spirit to pray through them, using a heavenly language.

The greek grammar does NOT support the Holy Spirit here praying through someone else. The grammar has the Holy Spirit praying directly to the Father without human go between. In fact, verse 26 plainly says that his groaning can not even be spoken or passed through a human mouth.

26Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

27And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

1 Cor 14:1-2
2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit."

Paul teaches us that one who speaks in a tongue utters mysteries in the Spirit. Even the one praying may not know what he prays. This is such a sacred experience, and the reason I was surprised that gocatholic said it is a mockery of God.

And, Paul goes on in I cor 14 to say that those tongues are to be interpreted, if there is no interpretator, be quiet. verse 28.

Virgil (70 - 19 B.C.) in the Aeneid, makes reference to the Sibylline priestess of Delos who engaged in ecstatic speech.

So, how does “tongues” in the mystry religions differ with “tongues” in the church?

catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/speaking-tongues1.htm

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

1 Corinthians 14
Prayer Language

1-3Go after a life of love as if your life depended on it—because it does. Give yourselves to the gifts God gives you. Most of all, try to proclaim his truth. If you praise him in the private language of tongues, God understands you but no one else does, for you are sharing intimacies just between you and him. **But when you proclaim his truth in everyday speech, you’re letting others in on the truth so that they can grow and be strong and experience his presence with you. **
4-5The one who prays using a private “prayer language” certainly gets a lot out of it, but proclaiming God’s truth to the church in its common language brings the whole church into growth and strength. **I want all of you to develop intimacies with God in prayer, but please don’t stop with that. Go on and proclaim his clear truth to others. It’s more important that everyone have access to the knowledge and love of God in language everyone understands than that you go off and cultivate God’s presence in a mysterious prayer language—unless, of course, there is someone who can interpret what you are saying for the benefit of all. **
6-8Think, friends: If I come to you and all I do is pray privately to God in a way only he can understand, what are you going to get out of that? If I don’t address you plainly with some insight or truth or proclamation or teaching, what help am I to you? *If musical instruments—flutes, say, or harps—aren’t played so that each note is distinct and in tune, how will anyone be able to catch the melody and enjoy the music? If the trumpet call can’t be distinguished, will anyone show up for the battle? *
9-12So if you speak in a way no one can understand, what’s the point of opening your mouth? There are many languages in the world and they all mean something to someone. But if I don’t understand the language, it’s not going to do me much good. It’s no different with you. **Since you’re so eager to participate in what God is doing, why don’t you concentrate on doing what helps everyone in the church? **
13-17So, when you pray in your private prayer language, don’t hoard the experience for yourself. Pray for the insight and ability to bring others into that intimacy. If I pray in tongues, my spirit prays but my mind lies fallow, and all that intelligence is wasted. So what’s the solution? The answer is simple enough. Do both. I should be spiritually free and expressive as I pray, but I should also be thoughtful and mindful as I pray. I should sing with my spirit, and sing with my mind. If you give a blessing using your private prayer language, which no one else understands, how can some outsider who has just shown up and has no idea what’s going on know when to say “Amen”? Your blessing might be beautiful, but you have very effectively cut that person out of it.

18-19I’m grateful to God for the gift of praying in tongues that he gives us for praising him, which leads to wonderful intimacies we enjoy with him. I enter into this as much or more than any of you. But when I’m in a church assembled for worship, **I’d rather say five words that everyone can understand and learn from than say ten thousand that sound to others like gibberish. **
20-25To be perfectly frank, I’m getting exasperated with your infantile thinking. How long before you grow up and use your head—your adult head? It’s all right to have a childlike unfamiliarity with evil; a simple no is all that’s needed there. But there’s far more to saying yes to something. Only mature and well-exercised intelligence can save you from falling into gullibility. It’s written in Scripture that God said,

*** In strange tongues
and from the mouths of strangers
I will preach to this people,
but they’ll neither listen nor believe.***

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

*** In strange tongues
and from the mouths of strangers
I will preach to this people,
but they’ll neither listen nor believe.***

**So where does it get you, all this speaking in tongues no one understands? **It doesn’t help believers, and it only gives unbelievers something to gawk at. Plain truth-speaking, on the other hand, goes straight to the heart of believers and doesn’t get in the way of unbelievers. If you come together as a congregation and some unbelieving outsiders walk in on you as you’re all praying in tongues, **unintelligible **to each other and to them, won’t they assume you’ve taken leave of your senses and get out of there as fast as they can? But if some unbelieving outsiders walk in on a service where people are speaking out God’s truth, the **plain words **will bring them up against the truth and probe their hearts. Before you know it, they’re going to be on their faces before God, recognizing that God is among you.

26-33So here’s what I want you to do. When you gather for worship, each one of you be prepared with something that will be useful for all: Sing a hymn, teach a lesson, tell a story, lead a prayer, provide an insight. If prayers are offered in tongues, two or three’s the limit, and then only if someone is present who can interpret what you’re saying. Otherwise, keep it between God and yourself. And no more than two or three speakers at a meeting, with the rest of you listening and taking it to heart. Take your turn, no one person taking over. Then each speaker gets a chance to say something special from God, and you all learn from each other. If you choose to speak, you’re also responsible for how and when you speak. When we worship the right way, God doesn’t stir us up into confusion; he brings us into harmony. This goes for all the churches—no exceptions.

34-36Wives must not disrupt worship, talking when they should be listening, asking questions that could more appropriately be asked of their husbands at home. God’s Book of the law guides our manners and customs here. Wives have no license to use the time of worship for unwarranted speaking. Do you—both women and men—imagine that you’re a sacred oracle determining what’s right and wrong? Do you think everything revolves around you?

37-38If any one of you thinks God has something for you to say or has inspired you to do something, pay close attention to what I have written. This is the way the Master wants it. If you won’t play by these rules, God can’t use you. Sorry.

Look at the flow of the chapter, it plainly calls for order in church, one speaker at a time, with interpretation. Not the confusion in pentecostal churches.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I guess the obvious question to ask is, how often these days do people actually speak in human languages that they do not know, and which are understood by nearby listeners?

In the Early Church there were both kinds of tongues. Are there still both kinds today, and if so, in what proportions?

During Augistines’ time “tongues” ceased because there was no need for them. In the US, most people speak English, and as such there is no need for them today. Tongues is the least of the spiritual gifts — ask yourself, how many people in pentecostal churches have a higher gift like healing?

I Cor 12

28And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

30Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with **tongues? **do all **interpret? **

What percentage of pentecostal congregations have the higher gifts?

How many have the gift of apostleship?

How many have the gift of prophethood?

How many have the gift of working miracles?

How many have the gift of healings?

How many have the gift of helps?

How many have the gift of administration?

How many have the gift of diversities of tongues?

How many have the gift of interpretations?

During the same time, Augustine (354 - 430), who set the mold for western Christianity for seven hundred years, elaborates on the cessation of tongues:

" In the earliest times, ‘the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues’ which they had not learned, ‘as the Spirit gave them utterance.’ These were signs adapted to the time for there behooved to be that betokening of the Spirit in all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening and it passed away."

To Augustine, tongues were a special apostolic dispensation for evangelizing and no more. In referring to the baptism of the Spirit he wrote:

“For the Holy Spirit is not only given by the laying on of hands amid the testimony of temporal sensible miracles, as was given in former days to be the credentials of rudimentary faith, and for the extension of the first beginning of the church. For who expects in these days that those on whom hands are laid that they may receive the Holy Ghost should forthwith being to speak with tongues?” (Homilies on 1 John VI 10; NPNF2, v. 7, pp. 497-498).

Again, Augustine writes:

" …whereas even now the Holy Ghost is received, yet no one speaks in the tongues of all nations, because the Church herself already speaks the languages of all nations: since whoever is not in the Church receives not the Holy Ghost." (The Gospel of John, Tractate 32).

catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/speaking-tongues1.htm

Do we really have a need for speaking in tongues today?

Missionaries attend college and schools to learn the language and culture of the peoples that they are going out to reach.

Are there hundreds of language groups that there is no one in the church today that speaks their language?



Why do Pentecostals lack the Fruits of the Holy Spirit? Gal 5.

If they are indeed filled with the Spirit would not the fruits be there too? And, yet many pentecostal - charismatic christians remain immature. I have encountered people who have been attending the same pentecostal type churches for years, and there is no evidence of spiritual growth. Look at the Corinthians they were likely the most immature church Paul had to deal with. They even put up with sexual sin to the level that even the pagans would not tolerate.

1 Corinthians 5

1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man has his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this?