If we are not justified in Baptism...Then Christ died in vain

[ltwin]

(Continuation of post #180)

Un-interpreted tongues

When it comes to un-interpreted tongues, we must distinguish that which is spoken in church and that which is spoken in private.

First, consider tongues spoken in private devotion. In this case, Paul’s instruction that tongues must be interpreted does not apply, since one is not seeking to edify anyone else. The content would be the same as already outlined. How would an individual determine if they were speaking godly speech? The first indication would be the intent of the person. Does the person intend to spend time in devotion to and communion with God? If the person’s intent is pure, it is unlikely they will be speaking something diabolical. Another criteria that can be applied is whether the gift of tongues was granted when the individual asked God for an outpouring of God’s Spirit in their life. “What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:11-13). What if they are simply making noises? If someone’s intent is pure, they will not be making anything up; they will simply speak what comes forth out of their spirit.

When we consider un-interpreted tongues spoken in church, more factors do come into play. On a personal level, the indicators in the previous paragraph still apply. However, the leaders of the church have a responsibility to make sure that people are not mocking the Holy Spirit. If someone speaks in tongues loud enough where they are drawing attention to themselves, they or someone else should interpret. If there is no interpretation, they should be instructed about what is proper. If they are really speaking in tongues, they are simply giving praise, thanks, or prayer in the spirit. They simply need to be instructed to be more quiet unless they are specifically led to direct their speech to the congregation and provide an interpretation. If someone is acting in a fraudulent way, then that can be handled by whoever has charge over the service.

Whereas amongst the Catholic Saints, the speaking in tongues can be proven by the experience of those who hear them.

Among non-Catholics, speaking in tongues can also be proven by the experience of those who hear it. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul has provided all of us with criteria to judge the experience of glossolalic speech.

 

[De_Maria]

Well, gosh since you keep bringing this up I guess you really do want an answer. Even though this isn’t the topic of the thread

Who brought up glossolalia, you or I?

Who brought up the charismatic movement in the Church, you or I?

Be honest.

I’ll answer.

Finally.

Our purpose should not be to determine whether someone is speaking in the language of angels or not. Neither should our aim be to decipher if someone is speaking Chinese or Japanese.

This sounds like a personal opinion. Do you have something to base it upon? Because Scripture says:

1 Thessalonians 5:21
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Therefore, your opinion seems to contradict the Apostolic directive. Especially, in light of the fact that:

2 Corinthians 11:13-14
King James Version (KJV)
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

So, what justification do you have for claiming we should not determine whether one is speaking in the language of angels, when in listening to many of them, they sound more like they are speaking a demonic tongue rather than an angelic.

The purpose of glossolalic speech in the church is not to determine what the language is. The purpose is to discern what is being communicated by the language. Is it godly communication?

That sounds like a contradiction to me.

First, you said one should not determine whether the language is truly angelic nor even if it is another earthly language.

But, now you say you should determine what is being said.

Let us express this principle in the words of St. Paul, “The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up” (1 Cor. 14:5)…

Absolutely! This is the principle I gave for the Catholic phenomenon which is experienced by the Saints. The listeners understand what is being said and can interpret.

Paul says that one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God. He speaks mysteries in the Spirit (verse 2). Not only does Paul tell us about the gift of tongues; he also tells us in the same chapter about a gift of interpretation. It follows then that we must separate interpreted tongues from tongues left un-interpreted.

That is what I want to focus upon. Tongues left uninterpreted.

Because, again, it has been my experience, that Pentecostals rarely ever interpret what is being said. I don’t remember even one Pentecostal responding to the question, “What did he say?” The closest they’ve ever come is to say, “It sounded like a language.”

In fact, I have spoken to some who claimed to have spoken in tongue and they didn’t know what they said. So, how could they have been communicating with God.

Interpreted tongues

When it comes to interpreted tongues, Paul tells the Corinthians that “in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (verse 19) …

Did you pay attention to that? Let only one or two or at the most THREE, speak in tongues. But frequently, in fact, most of the time, as the tales have been recounted to me, it is as though entire congregations begin to babble.

Notice also the orderliness of the affair. Whereas, Pentecostals seem to abhor order. Their affairs sound like parties to me. Music blaring, people dancing and falling out, babbling all over the place.

Paul asks the Corinthians in verse 6, “Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching?” We have our first indication from Paul that the content of glossolalic speech could either be prophetic or didactic. However, Paul does not seem to limit glossolalia to prophetic or instructive language. …

Exactly.

Now be honest. How many times does that happen in your congregation?

(

Continued in next post)

Ok.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[De_Maria]

(Continuation of post #180)

Un-interpreted tongues

When it comes to un-interpreted tongues, we must distinguish that which is spoken in church and that which is spoken in private.

First, consider tongues spoken in private devotion…

That is not in question. So, I’ll skip to your response concerning the discernment of public displays of glossolalia which are not interpreted.

When we consider un-interpreted tongues spoken in church, more factors do come into play.

Agreed.

On a personal level, the indicators in the previous paragraph still apply. However, the leaders of the church have a responsibility to make sure that people are not mocking the Holy Spirit. If someone speaks in tongues loud enough where they are drawing attention to themselves, they or someone else should interpret. If there is no interpretation, they should be instructed about what is proper. If they are really speaking in tongues, they are simply giving praise, thanks, or prayer in the spirit. They simply need to be instructed to be more quiet unless they are specifically led to direct their speech to the congregation and provide an interpretation. If someone is acting in a fraudulent way, then that can be handled by whoever has charge over the service.

Among non-Catholics, speaking in tongues can also be proven by the experience of those who hear it. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul has provided all of us with criteria to judge the experience of glossolalic speech.

The one thing you didn’t mention is and the one thing I was trying to draw from you is “order”.

Every single description of Pentecostal service which I have heard and that which I’ve seen on television or documentaries, is one of disorder and confusion. Whereas, Scripture says:
1 Corinthians 14:39-40
King James Version (KJV)
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

No wild noisy parties with music blaring and people babbling and women falling out. Decency and order.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[ltwin]

Who brought up glossolalia, you or I?

In post 101, you asked, “If Catholic and Pentecostal doctrine are so similar, why don’t you simply begin to attend a Catholic Church. I’m sure there is one near you.” I answered your questions, including the differences in spiritual gifts. You then continued the conversation about spiritual gifts.

This sounds like a personal opinion. Do you have something to base it upon?

And what of your insistence on proof that people are speaking angelic language. First of all, where does Scripture say we have to prove what language an unknown tongue is in the first place? In Acts, the people heard them speaking in their own languages. In Corinthians, people heard unintelligible sounds that didn’t make any sense unless someone with the supernatural gift of interpretation explained it to the congregation. Nowhere is any imperative to classify the language given. The only thing given is criteria to judge the message delivered. That is based on an analysis of the text. That is not my opinion.

Because Scripture says:

1 Thessalonians 5:21
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Therefore, your opinion seems to contradict the Apostolic directive. Especially, in light of the fact that:

2 Corinthians 11:13-14
King James Version (KJV)
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

You judge by the content of the interpreted message. Is it edifying to the body of Christ? That is the question Paul asks. He doesn’t ask, “Is this angelic or is this Chinese?” You are asking about angels. That is your preoccupation.

So, what justification do you have for claiming we should not determine whether one is speaking in the language of angels, when in listening to many of them, they sound more like they are speaking a demonic tongue rather than an angelic.

I’m not giving any justification for what you’re asking. I’m telling you that instead of wondering is this person speaking angel or demon, you need to be asking what is the content of the interpreted message. Is this prophetic or instructive? Is this a prayer? Is this thanksgiving? Is this edifying to the body of Christ? That is the how you judge these things.

That sounds like a contradiction to me.

First, you said one should not determine whether the language is truly angelic nor even if it is another earthly language.

But, now you say you should determine what is being said.

When someone speaks in an unknown tongue, we can do one of two things.

We can ask, “Did she speak in an angelic tongue?”

Or we can wait and see if that person or someone else present with the gift of interpretation is able to interpret the message. Once an interpretation is given, we then analyze the interpretation given. Does it build up, encourage, and bring consolation? If so, it was edifying.

Absolutely! This is the principle I gave for the Catholic phenomenon which is experienced by the Saints. The listeners understand what is being said and can interpret.

What Paul is talking about is not the same thing that happened in Acts. In Acts, all the listeners heard them speaking in their own languages. What occurred at Corinth, as Paul clearly says, is that there were people speaking in unknown and unintelligible language. No one could understand them, unless the person themselves or someone with the spiritual gift of interpretation interpreted the unintelligible language. If the same thing was happening as occurred in Acts, why would specific people with the gift of interpretation be needed? Wouldn’t everyone just hear what was said in their own language?

That is what I want to focus upon. Tongues left uninterpreted.

Because, again, it has been my experience, that Pentecostals rarely ever interpret what is being said. I don’t remember even one Pentecostal responding to the question, “What did he say?” The closest they’ve ever come is to say, “It sounded like a language.”

And exactly how many Pentecostal church services have you been in? Interpretation of tongues is an important part of a Pentecostal service.

But, context is important. A Pentecostal will only expect an interpretation if tongues are clearly addressed to other people. If someone is simply worshiping or praying in an unknown tongue, that is not really the concern of other people, unless the person is causing a disturbance or acting in an unruly manner. Once again, tongues speak to God, not men. Since none of us are God, its not surprising that we don’t understand when people speak in tongues.

In fact, I have spoken to some who claimed to have spoken in tongue and they didn’t know what they said. So, how could they have been communicating with God.

Once again:

Verse 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.”

Verse 13: “Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret.”

—If people who speak in tongues are supposed to know what they are saying, then why does Paul tell them to pray for the gift of interpretation?

Verse 14: “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.”

—Read this one carefully. Paul is saying that when one prays in a tongue his mind is unfruitful. In one’s mind, there is not an understanding of what one is saying. It is the spirit praying.

(Continued in post 185)

 

[ltwin]

(Continuation from post 184)

Did you pay attention to that? Let only one or two or at the most THREE, speak in tongues.

Yes, its a very practical rule. If three people give messages in tongues, followed by interpretation well you’d be in church for a long time.

But frequently, in fact, most of the time, as the tales have been recounted to me, it is as though entire congregations begin to babble.

And we all know that second hand information is beyond questioning.

But seriously, there are times in a Pentecostal or a charismatic service where time will be allowed for spontaneous worship. One could praise God in English or in a tongue. It does not matter because the entire congregation is lifting up their voice to God as one. It is not babbling, it is corporate worship.

Notice also the orderliness of the affair. Whereas, Pentecostals seem to abhor order. Their affairs sound like parties to me. Music blaring, people dancing and falling out, babbling all over the place.

We don’t abhor order. Our order is different from your order. Some churches are a little too enthusiastic for my tastes. But you’d be surprise to discover that most Pentecostal congregations in the United States are as ordered as the Baptist church down the street. Many Pentecostals do not even speak in tongues, and they would certainly not ever dance or fall out in church.

For those that do, however, it may be better to with hold criticism. You don’t know what they’ve been through in life, why they feel they need to praise God the way they are doing, and you don’t know what or how the Spirit is working in them at that moment. You don’t have to adopt the way they worship. You don’t have to invite them to the Catholic Church to have a Jericho march. Let them worship God the way they see fit in their own church.

The fact is, tongues has a legitimate use in worship. The fact that some people are very enthusiastic and may border on abuse, does not make all tongues use in worship illegitimate.

Exactly.

Now be honest. How many times does that happen in your congregation?

How much does it happen in yours? When is the last time that everyone in a Catholic church prophesied simultaneously so that a sinner was convicted and moved to repentance?

Tongues and interpretation happens frequently in my church. They are very powerful moments, and the messages are always inspiring.

No wild noisy parties with music blaring and people babbling and women falling out. Decency and order.

The Bible does say make a joyful noise, and let us not forget that King David danced before the Ark of God in an unseemly manner in 2 Sam. 6. Yet when his wife despised him, he told her he would get even more un-dignified. Sometimes, worship is not about our own comfort. Sometimes we do things that embarrass us and that don’t quite look flattering. But we know that the foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of men.

Maybe they aren’t out of order so much as you are too restricted? Quite frankly, “order” is not something that is fixed. “Order” is a relative term. Your definition of “order” is not mine. Many times what people call “order” is what the Bible calls “quenching the Spirit.”

 

[De_Maria]

In post 101, you asked, “If Catholic and Pentecostal doctrine are so similar, why don’t you simply begin to attend a Catholic Church. I’m sure there is one near you.” I answered your questions, including the differences in spiritual gifts. You then continued the conversation about spiritual gifts.

What you’re saying is that you introduced glossolalia in response to our discussion on authority. But you introduced glossolalia, correct?

And what of your insistence on proof that people are speaking angelic language. First of all, where does Scripture say we have to prove what language an unknown tongue is in the first place? In Acts, the people heard them speaking in their own languages. In Corinthians, people heard unintelligible sounds that didn’t make any sense unless someone with the supernatural gift of interpretation explained it to the congregation. Nowhere is any imperative to classify the language given. The only thing given is criteria to judge the message delivered. That is based on an analysis of the text. That is not my opinion.

Angelic in the sense that they glorify God. Angelic in the sense that they are not demonic.

1 Corinthians 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

The condition to test all things is not to be ignored here.

You judge by the content of the interpreted message. Is it edifying to the body of Christ? That is the question Paul asks. He doesn’t ask, “Is this angelic or is this Chinese?” You are asking about angels. That is your preoccupation.

Angelic in the sense that it is truly from heaven, truly a dialogue with God.

As usual, you grasp on straws to avoid the question being asked. Did I post any Scripture in the past which required that the one speaking must be an angel? No.

I simply asked the question in a manner that would be more easily grasped. How do you tell if the tongue is demonic (i.e. evil) or angelic (i.e. good)?

I’m not giving any justification for what you’re asking. I’m telling you that instead of wondering is this person speaking angel or demon, you need to be asking what is the content of the interpreted message.

That is precisely what I’m asking. I think you know that. But you are again, as you did with my mention of CARM, focusing on one thing inordinately, so as to draw attention from the substance of the question being discussed.

Is this prophetic or instructive? Is this a prayer? Is this thanksgiving? Is this edifying to the body of Christ? That is the how you judge these things.

Ok, now that you’ve got the gist of the matter. How do you do it?

Now, before you begin to harp on CARM again, my experience with CARM is with folks that consider themselves “evangelical”. But I’ve spoken to and known Pentecostals since my youth. Not once. Get this. Not once in over 40 years, has a Pentecostal spoken of the gift of interpretation.

All they speak of is the gift of tongues and when asked, “what did they say?” They have invariably answered, “I don’t know.”

Not only that, but I have witnessed their worship services in person, on television and have heard the descriptions from Pentecostals and non-Pentecostals alike and they have one thing in common. Disorder. They can’t possibly be classified as “decent and orderly” as commanded by the Apostle.

When someone speaks in an unknown tongue, we can do one of two things.

We can ask, “Did she speak in an angelic tongue?”

Or we can wait and see if that person or someone else present with the gift of interpretation is able to interpret the message. Once an interpretation is given, we then analyze the interpretation given. Does it build up, encourage, and bring consolation? If so, it was edifying.

That’s another difference with Scripture which you forget, Scripture says things are analyzed by two or three witnesses. This I find in every Catholic episode of glossolalia described to me. But I have not heard of in even one Pentecostal occasion of it.

What Paul is talking about is not the same thing that happened in Acts. In Acts, all the listeners heard them speaking in their own languages. What occurred at Corinth, as Paul clearly says, is that there were people speaking in unknown and unintelligible language. No one could understand them, unless the person themselves or someone with the spiritual gift of interpretation interpreted the unintelligible language. If the same thing was happening as occurred in Acts, why would specific people with the gift of interpretation be needed? Wouldn’t everyone just hear what was said in their own language?

I’m not sure if I understand the question.

As I see it, in the occasion of Acts 2, what we call the Pentecost, there were not one but many people given the gift of interpretation. That is why they could understand what the Apostles were saying, in their own tongues. While others thought they were drunk.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

And exactly how many Pentecostal church services have you been in?

Been in? None. But I’ve observed many. I walked right by a Pentecostal church almost every day on the way to the basket ball courts at the neighborhood park, from the time I was in elementary school to the time when I graduated from High School. And frequently, they worshipped with the doors open. And even when they worshipped with the doors closed, the music was blaring.

At the time, I was an atheist, but my Catholic friends who were generally walking with me frequently commented, “they sound like they’re having a party.” Or, “they sound like they’re having fun.”

I had Pentecostal friends, one of whom was my drinking buddy and he said to me. I often jibed him for being a Church goer and a drunk and his response to me was, “My sins are forgiven.” In other words, a proclamation of OSAS.

The others frequently described the service as women dropping like flies and throwing babies in the air, a great deal of babbling and dancing.

There was another, smaller, Pentecostal church about half a mile from my house. I passed by that one less frequently, but the services there were no different from the ones at the one close to my home. That one rarely had the doors open, but if anyone could hear themselves think, I would be surprised.

Interpretation of tongues is an important part of a Pentecostal service.

It is surprising then, that it is so rarely mentioned.

But, context is important. A Pentecostal will only expect an interpretation if tongues are clearly addressed to other people. If someone is simply worshiping or praying in an unknown tongue, that is not really the concern of other people, unless the person is causing a disturbance or acting in an unruly manner. Once again, tongues speak to God, not men. Since none of us are God, its not surprising that we don’t understand when people speak in tongues.

What you’re sayng then, is that even when it occurs in public, it is considered a private experience?

Once again:

Verse 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.”

Verse 13: “Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret.”

—If people who speak in tongues are supposed to know what they are saying, then why does Paul tell them to pray for the gift of interpretation?

He goes on:

31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

33 **For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
**
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Verse 14: “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.”

—Read this one carefully. Paul is saying that when one prays in a tongue his mind is unfruitful. In one’s mind, there is not an understanding of what one is saying. It is the spirit praying.

Good point. But that does not resolve the question about how you can tell whether the message is good (angelic) or bad (demonic).

And it seems to me that Pentecostals take such a pride in their purported gift of tongues, that the idea that it is of angelic source, can be questioned. God is not the author of confusion.

(Continued in post 185)

Ok.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[De_Maria]

(Continuation from post 184)

Yes, its a very practical rule. If three people give messages in tongues, followed by interpretation well you’d be in church for a long time.

And we all know that second hand information is beyond questioning.

But seriously, there are times in a Pentecostal or a charismatic service where time will be allowed for spontaneous worship.

I’m not doubting your word. It is just that my personal experience witnessing Pentecostal services and with individuals I have met and known for long periods of time and who called themselves Pentecostals and Assemblies of God, is that what I would consider, "spontaneous worship (dancing, speaking in tongues, singing, etc.) is the norm and little if any time is given to organized worship.

One could praise God in English or in a tongue. It does not matter because the entire congregation is lifting up their voice to God as one. It is not babbling, it is corporate worship.

We don’t abhor order. Our order is different from your order. Some churches are a little too enthusiastic for my tastes. But you’d be surprise to discover that most Pentecostal congregations in the United States are as ordered as the Baptist church down the street. Many Pentecostals do not even speak in tongues, and they would certainly not ever dance or fall out in church.

I am very surprised.

For those that do, however, it may be better to with hold criticism. You don’t know what they’ve been through in life, why they feel they need to praise God the way they are doing, and you don’t know what or how the Spirit is working in them at that moment. You don’t have to adopt the way they worship. You don’t have to invite them to the Catholic Church to have a Jericho march. Let them worship God the way they see fit in their own church.

I don’t criticize. Back in the day, before I came back to Christ, they were the butt of my jokes. But for the most part, they didn’t take me seriously.

Today, I simply compare to Scripture. Because, all Pentecostals, to my experience, are Bible only, regardless of what someone on this forum has said.

The fact is, tongues has a legitimate use in worship.

I never said otherwise. I simply think that it is frequently abused.

The fact that some people are very enthusiastic and may border on abuse, does not make all tongues use in worship illegitimate.

Of course not. That is however, why it is important to identify the ones that are truly from God.

How much does it happen in yours? When is the last time that everyone in a Catholic church prophesied simultaneously so that a sinner was convicted and moved to repentance?

Several years ago, I was a member of a group which styled itself, “the all night vigil” group. They all considered themselves charismatics. In a three to four year period that I practiced their devotion of spending all night singing and praying before the Holy Eucharist, there was not one instance of speaking in tongues.

However, I am aware of the ACTS movement (fairly new) and the Cursillo movements which have been in existence many decades and they bring people to public conviction of their sins, regularly. Speaking in regular human language.

My son, however, moved to Ireland and unbeknownst to me, became a Charismatic Catholic. He claims to have the gift of interpretation. God be praised! I don’t quench the Spirit. I simply give the same warnings I give everyone else. Make certain your worship is decent and orderly. Or it is not of God.

Tongues and interpretation happens frequently in my church. They are very powerful moments, and the messages are always inspiring.

Wonderful!

The Bible does say make a joyful noise, and let us not forget that King David danced before the Ark of God in an unseemly manner in 2 Sam. 6. Yet when his wife despised him, he told her he would get even more un-dignified. Sometimes, worship is not about our own comfort. Sometimes we do things that embarrass us and that don’t quite look flattering. But we know that the foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of men.

Maybe they aren’t out of order so much as you are too restricted? Quite frankly, “order” is not something that is fixed. “Order” is a relative term. Your definition of “order” is not mine. Many times what people call “order” is what the Bible calls “quenching the Spirit.”

I have seen Catholic Charismatic worship, I’ve seen people slain in the spirit, people singing praise, people praying out loud, and many other things. It has all been done in a decent and orderly manner.

I’ve also seen Pentecostal services and I’ve heard it described. I’ve personally heard some speak in tongues. I’ve never heard anyone interpret. With the exception of your explanation today, I can’t classify any of the others as describing anything decent and orderly.

I don’t think “order” is as relative a term as you make it. But God is your judge, not me.

Anyway, I’ve exhausted my knowledge on this matter. Thanks for the conversation.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[guanophore]

(Continuation of post #180)

Un-interpreted tongues

When it comes to un-interpreted tongues, we must distinguish that which is spoken in church and that which is spoken in private.

First, consider tongues spoken in private devotion. In this case, Paul’s instruction that tongues must be interpreted does not apply, since one is not seeking to edify anyone else. The content would be the same as already outlined. How would an individual determine if they were speaking godly speech? The first indication would be the intent of the person. Does the person intend to spend time in devotion to and communion with God? If the person’s intent is pure, it is unlikely they will be speaking something diabolical. Another criteria that can be applied is whether the gift of tongues was granted when the individual asked God for an outpouring of God’s Spirit in their life. “What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:11-13). What if they are simply making noises? If someone’s intent is pure, they will not be making anything up; they will simply speak what comes forth out of their spirit.

When we consider un-interpreted tongues spoken in church, more factors do come into play. On a personal level, the indicators in the previous paragraph still apply. However, the leaders of the church have a responsibility to make sure that people are not mocking the Holy Spirit. If someone speaks in tongues loud enough where they are drawing attention to themselves, they or someone else should interpret. If there is no interpretation, they should be instructed about what is proper. If they are really speaking in tongues, they are simply giving praise, thanks, or prayer in the spirit. They simply need to be instructed to be more quiet unless they are specifically led to direct their speech to the congregation and provide an interpretation. If someone is acting in a fraudulent way, then that can be handled by whoever has charge over the service.

Among non-Catholics, speaking in tongues can also be proven by the experience of those who hear it. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul has provided all of us with criteria to judge the experience of glossolalic speech.

Nice job Itwin! I am going to save this post in my archives.

With regard to the last line, Catholics are also able to discern this way, which is part of what I meant when I said “we know them by their fruits”. We don’t consider it a “proof”, though because we don’t consider the gifts of God subject to scientific scrutiny. We subject them to the authorities that God has placed over us to keep watch over our souls.

When anyone has received this give (Catholic or not) uses that gift to “edify himself” he will be built up in his faith, and this will be manifested in character and in the growing of the fruit of the spirit in daily life.

I know it was off topic but I agree with you that it seemed to find a need to be done, thank you.

 

[guanophore]

Who brought up glossolalia, you or I?

Who brought up the charismatic movement in the Church, you or I?

Be honest.

It is your thread, De Maria. Don’t you have some responsibility to keep it on topic? The issue of charismatic renewal came up in the course of Itwin pointing out how there has been a closing of the distance between Catholics and Pentecostals.

That is not even part of this debate. Goodbye. De Maria

After which you brought it up again:

Nor is it now. Are you saying that it is necessary for one to speak in tongues in order to be a Christian? If not, what is your point?

Here’s what Scripture says about tongues:

…So, what justification do you have for claiming we should not determine whether one is speaking in the language of angels, when in listening to many of them, they sound more like they are speaking a demonic tongue rather than an angelic.

That sounds like a contradiction to me.

First, you said one should not determine whether the language is truly angelic nor even if it is another earthly language.

But, now you say you should determine what is being said.

So basically you said it was off topic, then threw out a bunch of challenges around it. This is you taking the thread off your own topic! You chose one scripture about tongues and ignored all the rest…trying to prove a point by picking and choosing certain verses…what does that remind me of :ehh:

That is what I want to focus upon. Tongues left uninterpreted.

This was your choice, your statement. You are throwing out challenges to Itwin.

Because, again, it has been my experience, that Pentecostals rarely ever interpret what is being said.  I don't remember even one Pentecostal responding to the question, "What did he say?"  The closest they've ever come is to say, "It sounded like a language."

In fact, I have spoken to some who claimed to have spoken in tongue and they didn’t know what they said. So, how could they have been communicating with God.

Did you pay attention to that? Let only one or two or at the most THREE, speak in tongues. But frequently, in fact, most of the time, as the tales have been recounted to me, it is as though entire congregations begin to babble.

Notice also the orderliness of the affair. Whereas, Pentecostals seem to abhor order. Their affairs sound like parties to me. Music blaring, people dancing and falling out, babbling all over the place.

Now be honest. How many times does that happen in your congregation?

Basically here you seem to be finding fault and making disparaging comments about how you understand Pentecostal worship services.

Then in the next post you said:

 I'm contrasting result of Protestants leaving their church with Catholics leaving the Catholic Church.

Another topic that seems completely unrelated to the thread. But in which post you make the challenge again:

Did you ever respond as to how you know whether one is speaking in angelic tongue or simply making noises?

And again:

How do you distinguish the valid variety from the invalid?

And again:

 Show me how you know whether one is speaking in angelic tongues.  Knowing by their fruits is how we identify those who have faith in God.  How do you distinguish between a fake tongue speaker and a true one?  Show me.

By the time you got to this post, you seem to have entirely replaced the thread topic with your quest:

Quit changing the subject. How do you know the difference between a person who speaks the tongue of angels and one who is feigning that gift?

Again, how do you know the difference between a person who is feigning the gift of tongues and one who is genuine?

Everything you’ve brought up is way off topic.

I didn't change the topic.  You did.

The Holy Spirit blows where it will.  Not necessarily where they will.  That is why they can't tell when someone is speaking in angelic tpngues.  All they really know is that someone is claiming to speak in tongues.  But that claim is unproven.

Whereas amongst the Catholic Saints, the speaking in tongues can be proven by the experience of those who hear them.

If you use the little blue icon next to all these quotes each one will take you back to the post from whence it came. Itwin made a comment in passing about how Pentecostals have come closer to Catholics through the Charismatic Renewal. It was YOU that kept throwing out challenges and bigotry on the topic until he felt it necessary to make a response.
[/quote]

 

[ltwin]

Angelic in the sense that it is truly from heaven, truly a dialogue with God.

As usual, you grasp on straws to avoid the question being asked. Did I post any Scripture in the past which required that the one speaking must be an angel? No.

I simply asked the question in a manner that would be more easily grasped. How do you tell if the tongue is demonic (i.e. evil) or angelic (i.e. good)?

And I have told you, the content. If someone is prophesying you test the prophecy against the Word of God. If someone is teaching, you test the teaching against the Word of God. Etc., etc. Do these things line up with the word of God.

That is precisely what I’m asking. I think you know that. But you are again, as you did with my mention of CARM, focusing on one thing inordinately, so as to draw attention from the substance of the question being discussed.

No. I have repeatedly talked about the criteria by which we judge interpreted content. I’ve also talked about how to judge un-interpreted content. If a tongue is left un-interpreted, unless there are other signs of demonic influence, we have no basis to conclude just because someone is speaking un-intelligibly that they are under the influence of demons. If someone is speaking un-intelligibly in the context of a worship service, they are most likely worshiping.

Ok, now that you’ve got the gist of the matter. How do you do it?

What? I just told you. First, you have to be able to hear. Once you can hear, you listen. You use your reasoning and knowledge of God’s Word to judge whether something is edifying.

Now, before you begin to harp on CARM again, my experience with CARM is with folks that consider themselves “evangelical”. But I’ve spoken to and known Pentecostals since my youth. Not once. Get this. Not once in over 40 years, has a Pentecostal spoken of the gift of interpretation.

All they speak of is the gift of tongues and when asked, “what did they say?” They have invariably answered, “I don’t know.”

The gift of interpretation operates when a message is intended to be directed not just to
God, but to the congregation. When a tongue is meant to be heard by the entire congregation there is this “holy pause” in the service. The leaders of the service do not feel at liberty to proceed, and the people have a feeling of expectation that someone is burdened to speak. If this pause happens during the singing, all the music stops. No instruments are played. No one leaves the sanctuary.Everything and everyone stops what they are doing and waits.

And then a person speaks out. Their voice is projected over the entire church. After they have concluded the message, there will be time given for whoever is burdened with an interpretation to speak out. Someone will give the interpretation, and God is praised by the congregation. The service’s regular order is resumed. I have never seen a message and interpretation given during a sermon. It only usually happens during singing or a time of corporate prayer.

The AG answers many of these questions in a FAQ format, here. There is an informative and short video by the General Secretary of the Assemblies of God that is devoted entirely to interpretation of tongues, here.

Not only that, but I have witnessed their worship services in person, on television and have heard the descriptions from Pentecostals and non-Pentecostals alike and they have one thing in common. Disorder. They can’t possibly be classified as “decent and orderly” as commanded by the Apostle.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions.

That’s another difference with Scripture which you forget, Scripture says things are analyzed by two or three witnesses. This I find in every Catholic episode of glossolalia described to me. But I have not heard of in even one Pentecostal occasion of it.

Well, since tongues and interpretation happen before a congregation, there are always multiple witnesses. Tongues as a prayer language is between that person and God. We don’t require two or three witnesses when someone prays in a known tongue. Why should that be different when someone prays in the spirit.

I’m not sure if I understand the question.

As I see it, in the occasion of Acts 2, what we call the Pentecost, there were not one but many people given the gift of interpretation. That is why they could understand what the Apostles were saying, in their own tongues. While others thought they were drunk.

Even if everyone in the Acts story was given the gift of interpretation (which we are not told), in Corinth it was different. Even the people with the gift of tongues did not have the gift of interpretation and were instructed to pray for the gift. So, counting on everyone in the church to automatically understand what is being said is not a test that Scripture provides for a determination of authenticity or godliness, either at Corinth or in cases today.

(Continued in next post)

 

[ltwin]

(Continued from previous post)

Been in? None. But I’ve observed many. I walked right by a Pentecostal church almost every day on the way to the basket ball courts at the neighborhood park, from the time I was in elementary school to the time when I graduated from High School. And frequently, they worshipped with the doors open. And even when they worshipped with the doors closed, the music was blaring.

At the time, I was an atheist, but my Catholic friends who were generally walking with me frequently commented, “they sound like they’re having a party.” Or, “they sound like they’re having fun.”

I had Pentecostal friends, one of whom was my drinking buddy and he said to me. I often jibed him for being a Church goer and a drunk and his response to me was, “My sins are forgiven.” In other words, a proclamation of OSAS.

Pentecostals consider drinking alcohol in any amount a taboo. While I and many others would not go so far as to call it a sin, it is considered a serious matter among Pentecostals. All Pentecostal denominations that I’m familiar with do not tolerate it among their ordained clergy, and if a layperson is discovered to consume alcohol it can affect his standing in the church. With all do respect, from what you’ve told me, this person sounds like a cafeteria Pentecostal.

The others frequently described the service as women dropping like flies and throwing babies in the air, a great deal of babbling and dancing.

No babies are thrown, but a tambourine or two may take a trip every once in a while.

There was another, smaller, Pentecostal church about half a mile from my house. I passed by that one less frequently, but the services there were no different from the ones at the one close to my home. That one rarely had the doors open, but if anyone could hear themselves think, I would be surprised.

You never attended any of the churches you are talking about, but you are comfortable saying they were both alike on the basis of how loud you think the music is?

It is surprising then, that it is so rarely mentioned.

Considering that you don’t seem to have much direct contact with Pentecostals, it isn’t all that surprising. Meanwhile, the AG felt it was important enough to include it on its “What to expect” notice, which is used in many churches so visitors can understand what is going on.

What you’re sayng then, is that even when it occurs in public, it is considered a private experience?

Not a private experience, but a personal expression of worship to God. Pentecostals are verbal in their worship even in English (or other vernacular). Some Pentecostals are verbal worshipers in tongues. Context is key, and individual congregations can be different. Some Pentecostal churches actively discourage an expression of tongues in worship, unless accompanied by interpretation. Others do not discourage the use of tongues as a personal expression of worship in the corporate assembly. Once again, its all about context, and its easy to miss all that watching a service from your living room.

Verse 14: “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.”

Good point. But that does not resolve the question about how you can tell whether the message is good (angelic) or bad (demonic).

Well, you’re getting into questions of how can we judge the intentions of someone’s heart. Tongues ultimately arise out of the spirit of a person. How can we judge what someone’s spirit is saying if we can’t understand them? It is reasonable, however, the people you go to church with, spend time with, get to know, pray with, in short share fellowship in the church are glorifying God in tongues, just as they glorify him in English. If someone is demonically oppressed to the extent that they are speaking in unknown tongues, then people in the church should have realized the presence of a problem long before the person starts exhibiting demonic inspired glossolalia. I suppose we could construct a Pentecostal version of the Inquisition, but examining every instance of un-interpreted glossolalia from the over 200 million Pentecostals around the world would be a daunting task.

And it seems to me that Pentecostals take such a pride in their purported gift of tongues, that the idea that it is of angelic source, can be questioned. God is not the author of confusion.

You’re so right. Those two Pentecostal churches you walked by on the street, your Pentecostal drinking buddy, and TV preachers have given you such an enlightened understanding of the 279 million Pentecostals all over the world.

I appreciate you informing me about the motives of myself and fellow Pentecostal Christians. You must have the gift of knowledge? :extrahappy:

(Continued in next post)

 

[ltwin]

(Continued from previous post)

I’m not doubting your word. It is just that my personal experience witnessing Pentecostal services and with individuals I have met and known for long periods of time and who called themselves Pentecostals and Assemblies of God, is that what I would consider, "spontaneous worship (dancing, speaking in tongues, singing, etc.) is the norm and little if any time is given to organized worship.

Today, spontaneous worship is not a regular feature in many (dare I say most) Assemblies of God churches. There have been a lot of studies on this issue discussing the decline of distinctive Pentecostal worship practices in the AG and other historically white Pentecostal denominations in the USA. Two are by sociologist (as well as charismatic Catholic) Margaret Poloma, The Assemblies of God at the Crossroads: Charisma and Institutional Dilemmas (1989) and The Assemblies of God: Godly Love and the Revitalization of American Pentecostalism (2009).

I am very surprised.

Don’t be. Pentecostals were surprised a few decades ago, now its old news. In 2006, a 10-country survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (pages 16-17) found that 49 percent of Pentecostals in the United States, 50 percent in Brazil, 41 percent in South Africa, and 54 percent in India said they “never” speak or pray in tongues.

I don’t criticize. Back in the day, before I came back to Christ, they were the butt of my jokes. But for the most part, they didn’t take me seriously.

Today, I simply compare to Scripture. Because, all Pentecostals, to my experience, are Bible only, regardless of what someone on this forum has said.

Yes, the Bible is the standard of doctrine and worship. It is rule by which we judge everything. It does not mean that we exclude everything else, only that we judge everything else according to Scripture.

Of course not. That is however, why it is important to identify the ones that are truly from God.

Someone abusing the order of the service does not mean their tongue is not of God. Paul never questions the godliness of the un-interpreted tongues. He does not say, “Those who are disorderly are speaking demonic tongues.” Paul is concerned with maintaining order and intelligibility. However, he is not equating “tongues spoken out of order” with “tongues that have bad content.”

Several years ago, I was a member of a group which styled itself, “the all night vigil” group. They all considered themselves charismatics. In a three to four year period that I practiced their devotion of spending all night singing and praying before the Holy Eucharist, there was not one instance of speaking in tongues.

However, I am aware of the ACTS movement (fairly new) and the Cursillo movements which have been in existence many decades and they bring people to public conviction of their sins, regularly. Speaking in regular human language.

Pentecostals do not spend the majority of their church services speaking in tongues. Most of the service occurs in the vernacular language of the people.

Anyway, I’ve exhausted my knowledge on this matter. Thanks for the conversation.

You’re welcome. I enjoyed the dialogue as well.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Guanophore and others—

Regarding my questions about baptism—I think I’ll stay on this thread because I want to refer to an earlier post by Po18guy. I’ll wait till the tongues discussion is finished, though…and I’m still trying to figure out how to pare down part of the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on baptism to quote, so I’m in no hurry.

FWIW re: tongues—I know a cradle Catholic spiritual director, formerly a biologist, level-headed and intelligent, who said that speaking in tongues (untranslated, in private prayer) is the most intelligent thing he does everyday.

 

[ltwin]

Guanophore and others—

Regarding my questions about baptism—I think I’ll stay on this thread because I want to refer to an earlier post by Po18guy. I’ll wait till the tongues discussion is finished, though…and I’m still trying to figure out how to pare down part of the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on baptism to quote, so I’m in no hurry.

FWIW re: tongues—I know a cradle Catholic spiritual director, formerly a biologist, level-headed and intelligent, who said that speaking in tongues (untranslated, in private prayer) is the most intelligent thing he does everyday.

I think the tongues debate is done, based on De Maria’s comment. I honestly did not intend to get dragged into a debate about that. I’m interested in reading your question and the response.

 

[guanophore]

I appreciate you informing me about the motives of myself and fellow Pentecostal Christians. You must have the gift of knowledge? :extrahappy:

Itwin, I want to thank you for your patient and courteous explanations here. Although I am not sure they will be able to assuage the bigotry that is contained in the charges to which you are responding, I am sure that some of the lurkers reading the thread will benefit from them. You have demonstrated much more Christlike character and charity in your posts than is evidenced in the ones you are answering.

 

[guanophore]

Anyway, I've exhausted my knowledge on this matter.  Thanks for the conversation.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Abide, it appears that we are at a point where we can return to the thread topic, something about which the OP presumably has more knowledge. I recommend that you not try to introduce too much at one time, if you are wrestling with the whole encycl. entry. Try to choose a sentence or phrase to start.

 

[guanophore]

But I have yet to see the example of a mainline Protestant denomination which embraces Tradition as you claim.

In other words, they no longer hold to Sacred Tradition. But you claim they do. So, now you’re contradicting yourself, again.

Here is a post that exemplifies what I am trying to explain to you. Lutherans of the Missouri Synod espouse the confessions which contain much of the Sacred Tradition, but not all.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Abide, it appears that we are at a point where we can return to the thread topic, something about which the OP presumably has more knowledge. I recommend that you not try to introduce too much at one time, if you are wrestling with the whole encycl. entry. Try to choose a sentence or phrase to start.

Guanophore—That’s good advice. I’m not really wrestling with the whole encyclopedia entry; it’s just a couple of subjects within the entry that I’m hoping to get clarified.

I’m going to start with what was my second question just because it’s a more straightforward question from my end.

Here’s a link to the old Catholic Encyclopedia entry on baptism: newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm

I understand the “baptism as the ‘door of the Church’” idea in the article’s heading. But, several years ago I was reading something from a Catholic source that talked about how, in the early church, some people would delay their baptism for various reasons.

In the interest of not getting into too wide-ranging of a discussion right now, rather than asking about the variety of reasons that some early Christians waited to be baptized, I’m most curious about one person in particular: St. Basil the Great. His parents were considered very devout Christians. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on St. Basil----www.newadvent.org/cathen/02330b.htm—his father “St. Basil the Elder was noted for his virtue and also won considerable reputation as a teacher in Caesarea”.

Though he was raised in this Christian household, St. Basil the Great, born around 329, wasn’t baptized till 357, apparently after a sort of spiritual awakening. I’m wondering why he wasn’t baptized as a child by his Christian parents.

St. Basil’s friend, Gregory of Nazianzus, in his “Oration 40”, does touch upon infant baptism with approval, though he also seems to advise waiting till the child has some understanding at 3-4 years old if there’s no concern about an early death.

So, back to St. Basil the Great—was there enough variation in practice at that time that his devout Christian upbringing/adult baptism wasn’t unusual?

I’m not looking for a debate or argument. I’m just curious to see if someone can fill in with more information here.

Thanks.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Our entire community is still praying for all of you.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Thank you, De Maria, for your prayers for all the many people still affected by Hurricane Sandy.