Interpretation of Tongues Question(s)

[Widlast]

And therein lies the problem.
Certain groups within the Christian fold have put an absurd amount of emphasis upon a phenomenon that is poorly understood in it’s modern context and is easily subject to fraud.

Any attempt to validate or disprove of their glossolalia is met within disdain.

Why do so many use a behavior as a yardstick of faith that is so easily faked?

Personally, I would say that nearly 100% of all modern examples of glossolalia are pure nonsense.

If it does not stand up to test, it is false.

 

[ltwin]

Thanks for the reply, Itwin.

Can you expand at all on this “etiquette” - I’m just curious…what happens when more than one person wants to give an interpretation?

If two people begin to offer an interpretation at the same time, one of them needs to stop and let the other finish undisturbed. The churches I’ve been to have always had one person speak in tongues followed by one person offering the interpretation.

But in Scripture, Paul states that if another person was given “a revelation” he could stand up and begin speaking and the previous speaker should then yield and sit down. But I’ve never seen any church actually try to do it this way.

Controversy can happen when people begin speaking in tongues at inopportune times during the service. Some churches are more strict about these things and the times during which you can give a message are very limited. While others are much more loosely structured.

In my church, we never really had messages delivered during the preaching (which makes since given the Bible is infallible while messages in tongues are not). However, praise/worship or pauses during the service are generally ok.

Once someone begins to speak in tongues to give a message the entire church stops what its doing and listens. This is a very solemn time because messages in tongues could be prophetic, and in that case, its a word from the Lord. Then we wait for someone to give the interpretation. The same interpreter will not always get the message. I’ve never been in a service where there was no one able to interpret, but it could happen if lets say the person who was given the message was just beginning to move in this gift and was still not confident in giving a message.

It’s generally considered good practice not to deliver messages in tongues if you’ve just started attending a congregation, because you still don’t know who are the interpreters in that church.

My grandparents were in a church once that they were visiting. Someone delivered a message in tongues. My grandmother interpreted it, but it was not a very encouraging message. I believe it dealt with some sin or wrongdoing with leadership in that church. The people did not take that well. She was still giving the interpretation as my grandfather was pulling her out of the church, and they never went there again.

My uncle once gave a message in tongues and when it was interpreted it was calling the leadership of the church to repentance. The pastors “reinterpreted” the message. It was clear to everyone by the context that this was a prophetic message, but they said it was a prayer from my uncle’s heart. In this way, they could simply dismiss this as what my uncle thought instead of as being a message from God.

That caused quite an uproar in the church, and that pastor wasn’t there for long. Pentecostal pastors have to tread lightly over how they “spin” messages in tongues because it’s taken as quite a serous matter.

So, are you saying that you’d never hear say several people offering interpretations, even one right after the other, on what was just said?

No, you wouldn’t see that. One person speaks in tongues. Either they or someone else interprets. We all praise God and then move on with the service.

My grandfather has mentioned before that he was about to interpret a tongue but someone else gave it before him. It’s not seen as a big deal.

 

[ltwin]

Any attempt to validate or disprove of their glossolalia is met within disdain.

I don’t see tongue-speaking Christians “disdaining” anything. The very fact that we’ve been willing to participate in studies which tend to have unfavorable results toward our claims would seem to indicate that we’re more than willing to provide opportunities for scientific inquiry

Why do so many use a behavior as a yardstick of faith that is so easily faked?

Quite simply, we don’t use tongues as a “yardstick” for anything. As Paul said, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.”

 

[ChibiViolet]

Xenoglossy/Xenoglosia is speaking a living real language that the speaker supposedly has never in any way, shape or form ever had contact with.

So for example if someone growing in in say rural Kansas (sorry, Kansas - no offense!) who has only ever heard English spoken ANYWHERE (people, radio, television, internet, etc., etc.) suddenly starts speaking fluent Gaelic or German, or Navajo, or French - that’s xenoglossy.

There are no known true modern documented cases of xenoglossy anywhere.

I mean this with all due respect…what makes you think they are demonic as opposed to just simply glossolalia (‘tongues’)? I’m really curious about that as a lot of people say the same thing.

Is it the sounds/‘words’ themselves or the intonation in which they are spoken (or both) that cause you to associate the term ‘demonic’ with it (or is it something else entirely)??

People who have never heard glossolalia may tend to get a bit freaked out when they first encounter it - I get that reaction from some people with a few real languages I speak; especially when people don’t expect it.

I’ve always felt that it comes from demons. I’ve gotten such terrible feelings from it–feelings that made me feel like I’m evil and like I’m being open to Satan. Also the one word that I know that has come up the most is “Satani,” which obviously means Satan. What I have seems to be a mish-mash of languages as I recognize some of the words like the one I mentioned and also varying forms of the word “muerte,” which means dead in Spanish and also the word “sakura,” which means cherry blossom in Japanese. One time when I spoke in tongues, my throat made a click noise and I can’t make a noise like that normally (I tried to make it again and I couldn’t.) Many times when I’ve gotten the urge to speak in tongues, I’ve felt nauseous if I didn’t follow it.

Also, one time it came out involuntarily at a time when I had just barely promised God I would not do this again. I know this is not of God.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

Xenoglossy/Xenoglosia is speaking a living real language that the speaker supposedly has never in any way, shape or form ever had contact with.

.

So as you explain it Xenoglossy is what actually happened at Pentecost, or something close to it because as the disciples spoke everyone heard them in their own language which the disciples did not know. This bore much good fruit. But what good fruit, with all due respect, does this modern-day “talking in tongues” which is completely unrecognizable, bear?

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

I’ve always felt that it comes from demons. I’ve gotten such terrible feelings from it–feelings that made me feel like I’m evil and like I’m being open to Satan. Also the one word that I know that has come up the most is “Satani,” which obviously means Satan. What I have seems to be a mish-mash of languages as I recognize some of the words like the one I mentioned and also varying forms of the word “muerte,” which means dead in Spanish and also the word “sakura,” which means cherry blossom in Japanese. One time when I spoke in tongues, my throat made a click noise and I can’t make a noise like that normally (I tried to make it again and I couldn’t.) Many times when I’ve gotten the urge to speak in tongues, I’ve felt nauseous if I didn’t follow it.

Also, one time it came out involuntarily at a time when I had just barely promised God I would not do this again. I know this is not of God.

Wow, were you part of the Catholic Charismatic Movement or part of a Pentecostal or some other type of protestant church?

My ex-boyfriend was Pentecostal, they sometime refer to it also as “catching the Holy Ghost.” He told me it happened to him once, I asked him what it felt like. The only way he described it was “weird”.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

@Itwin, can anyone be an interpreter or are their qualifications? Also can the speaker ever interpret what they say?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I’ve always felt that it comes from demons. I’ve gotten such terrible feelings from it–feelings that made me feel like I’m evil and like I’m being open to Satan. Also the one word that I know that has come up the most is “Satani,” which obviously means Satan. What I have seems to be a mish-mash of languages as I recognize some of the words like the one I mentioned and also varying forms of the word “muerte,” which means dead in Spanish and also the word “sakura,” which means cherry blossom in Japanese. One time when I spoke in tongues, my throat made a click noise and I can’t make a noise like that normally (I tried to make it again and I couldn’t.) Many times when I’ve gotten the urge to speak in tongues, I’ve felt nauseous if I didn’t follow it.

Also, one time it came out involuntarily at a time when I had just barely promised God I would not do this again. I know this is not of God.

Why do you feel it comes from demons? Are you a part of a charismatic group or do you know one? I would ask them for help, specifically from someone with the gift of discernment. You might be avoiding yielding to the Holy Spirit because you are experiencing something unfamiliar. Just for reference, Satini doesn’t mean Satan. It reminds me of a Catholic writer who was writing about how the world was embracing Satan and used the the character Damian in the movie The Omen and how Damian meant demon. Reading this from an investigative journalist was painful (because how had he not heard of the San Damiano cross or Damian of Molokai?) so if he made this mistake I understand why you came to the conclusion you did.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

@Itwin, can anyone be an interpreter or are their qualifications? Also can the speaker ever interpret what they say?

Interpretation of tongues is a gift just like the gift of tongues is a gift, along with word of knowledge, the discernment of spirits, healing, miracles, the gift of faith, and prophecy. Tongues is the least of all of the gifts. So, it’s up to the Holy Spirit who has the gift of interpretation. It’s not a job so there aren’t qualifications, but someone with the gift often works with others in a group who also have the gift of interpretation or discernment. Their gift is confirmed by the others. Many times during a prayer session someone would prophesy and another person would say, “I confirm that” using their gift of discernment.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

Interpretation of tongues is a gift just like the gift of tongues is a gift, along with word of knowledge, the discernment of spirits, healing, miracles, the gift of faith, and prophecy. Tongues is the least of all of the gifts. So, it’s up to the Holy Spirit who has the gift of interpretation. It’s not a job so there aren’t qualifications, but someone with the gift often works with others in a group who also have the gift of interpretation or discernment. Their gift is confirmed by the others. Many times during a prayer session someone would prophesy and another person would say, “I confirm that” using their gift of discernment.

Im guessing from your previous post that you are a member or have experience with a Charismatic Catholic group? I wonder, how different that is from those in a Pentecostal setting?

 

[ltwin]

Wow, were you part of the Catholic Charismatic Movement or part of a Pentecostal or some other type of protestant church?

From the way this sounds, it doesn’t appear to be anything like Christian glossolalia. Speaking in tongues is a voluntary action. As we like to say, “the Holy Spirit is a gentlemen.”

My ex-boyfriend was Pentecostal, they sometime refer to it also as “catching the Holy Ghost.” He told me it happened to him once, I asked him what it felt like. The only way he described it was “weird”.

“Catching the Holy Ghost.” With all due respect to your ex-boyfriend, that is a pretty disrespectful way to refer to the third member of the Trinity. He is a person, not a disease that you “catch.”

I can understand saying, “I was moved by the Spirit” or “I felt the Spirit” but “catching” him just sounds inappropriate.

@Itwin, can anyone be an interpreter or are their qualifications?

Anyone can interpret. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 14 that if we speak in a tongue we should pray to interpret. So, conceivably any Christian could pray for the gift of interpretation and potentially receive it.

Also can the speaker ever interpret what they say?

Yeah, it happens fairly often that the same person who delivers a message in tongue also interprets it. However, it doesn’t have to happen that way. As I said in an earlier post, the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation are companion gifts that teach us about the interdependence of the members of Christ’s body.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Im guessing from your previous post that you are a member or have experience with a Charismatic Catholic group? I wonder, how different that is from those in a Pentecostal setting?

I have in the past.

I don’t have any experience with Pentecostal groups except by casual association with members but I would say the main difference would be the sacraments. They were the foundation of our Catholic faith, especially the sacrament of confirmation; all those gifts lying around latent for years. The charismatic gifts that we had were gifts we received at confirmation and made manifest through yielding to the Holy Spirit. That’s not a theological explanation but more of a poetic one, like some Marian prayers. Hopefully it paints the right picture.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

“Catching the Holy Ghost.” With all due respect to your ex-boyfriend, that is a pretty disrespectful way to refer to the third member of the Trinity. He is a person, not a disease that you “catch.”

I can understand saying, “I was moved by the Spirit” or “I felt the Spirit” but “catching” him just sounds inappropriate.

Sorry, I never heard anyone take offense to that phrase but how you described it I could see how it lacks reverence. Its a term African-American people use often when talking about such instances, I guess it’s just colloquial.

 

[ffg]

I’m glad it was pointed out early that Penecost per the bible was a phenomena of hearing.

I agree it is forgotten often.

I had a priest friend once try and ‘teach’ me to speak in tongues. It didn’t seem possible without being forced.

Seeing people ‘turn it on’ like it was something they control was common (including during my lesson).

I don’t see it practiced much anymore.

Take care,

Mike

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

I have in the past.

I don’t have any experience with Pentecostal groups except by casual association with members but I would say the main difference would be the sacraments. They were the foundation of our Catholic faith, especially the sacrament of confirmation; all those gifts lying around latent for years. The charismatic gifts that we had were gifts we received at confirmation and made manifest through yielding to the Holy Spirit. That’s not a theological explanation but more of a poetic one, like some Marian prayers. Hopefully it paints the right picture.

I use to pass by a Charismatic parish on the bus on my way to my old job and I wanted to check it out just to see what it was like but I never got around to it.

 

[ltwin]

Sorry, I never heard anyone take offense to that phrase but how you described it I could see how it lacks reverence. Its a term African-American people use often when talking about such instances, I guess it’s just colloquial.

It’s not just African-Americans. I’ve heard white people say the same thing. It’s just a pet peeve of mine. I always cringe when I hear the Holy Spirit referred to as an “it.”

 

[Medawlinno]

Again, thanks for all the (name removed by moderator)ut - this is very helpful.

@ HungerNThirst4R:

"So as you explain it Xenoglossy is what actually happened at Pentecost, or something close to it because as the disciples spoke everyone heard them in their own language which the disciples did not know. This bore much good fruit. But what good fruit, with all due respect, does this modern-day “talking in tongues” which is completely unrecognizable, bear? "

Xenoglossy is just one explanation; there are a few others which do not involve xenoglosy or glosolalia.

For the bottom part of your post, you’d have to ask someone who practices speaking and interpreting glossolalia/tongues.

Not to beat a dead horse, but…just want to confirm: if a person ‘gives a tongue’ at say a church service, there will only ever be one ‘interpretation’ offered. Is that a correct assumption??

There seems to be one exception to the above: if the interpretation offered is somehow deemed incorrect, a re-interpretation may be offered, but this is a rather rare occurance. Is this also a correct assumption??

Thanks!

 

[ltwin]

Not to beat a dead horse, but…just want to confirm: if a person ‘gives a tongue’ at say a church service, there will only ever be one ‘interpretation’ offered. Is that a correct assumption??

Yes, at least, in my experience.

There seems to be one exception to the above: if the interpretation offered is somehow deemed incorrect, a re-interpretation may be offered, but this is a rather rare occurance. Is this also a correct assumption??

Thanks!

Re-interpreting is not what happens. That was a bad choice of words on my part. Every Christian has the responsibility to evaluate a message in tongues based on Scripture and common sense, but the pastor has a special responsibility to provide public correction if he thinks a message in tongues is somehow off or questionable. This is what the pastor would do. There would be no request for a re-interpretation.

Just to be clear, in an earlier post when I talked about pastors “re-interpreting” I did not mean they offered a whole new interpretation. I only meant that they stated from the pulpit that this was not a prophetic word it was a prayer. Thus, they wanted people to change the way they thought of the message–from God or to God. They said this was a prayer to God, when most of the congregation pretty clearly believed it was a message from God based on the basic grammar used.

So just to be clear there will be evaluation and discernment of a message. But no second interpretation.

 

[Medawlinno]

Thanks for the further clarification, Itwin. Kind of didn’t make sense with the whole “re-interpretation” thing.

 

[Usige]

So if I am following things correctly, then the modern practice of speaking in tongues couldn’t properly be classified as language. What I mean is there does not seem to be a grammar or corpus of words or phrases that have specific meaning. Given that multiple people can hear the same utterances and get different messages would imply that their is not a definitive way to decode the utterances, but rather requires both speaker and interpreter to receive gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Since only 2 people can directly participate in passing the message, I am stuggling to understand why God would give anyone these gifts as expressed in current usage. It seems to be very open to abuse. It also begs the question of why it was rare before 100 years ago, but now large communities have been inundated with these gifts. Xenoglossia makes sense to allow someone to spread the Gospel, but the repetitive and unintelligible utterances of today seem to be counter productive.

Given the limitations of the modern phenomenon, what is the stated reason or purpose for God gifting people with tongues that are non deterministic?

To be honest, I’m not even sure that the events of Acts was xenoglossia, since it almost seemed to be something like instant translation into multiple languages (i.e. I speak Aramaic, but person A hears Greek, person B hears Persian, and person C hears Urdu and all 3 hear the same message.) Xenoglossia implies that I think I’m speaking English, but am actually speaking French. That does not mean that someone who speaks Zulu could understand me.