Speaking in tongues: genuine charism or silly gibberish?

[fewnotmany]

. . . . how could someone talk in tongues if they have never did it before and what could it mean, this has bothered me for so long. can anyone tell me

Did your husband interprete your ‘talking in tongues’ to mean you believe in the resurrection?

From a biblical perspective, ‘talking in tongues’ **had **(past tense highlighted intentionally) to do with preaching the gospel – 1 Cor 15:3 For I (Paul) delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

Having stated that ‘talking in tongues’ had a specific purpose for a specific time, my answer to your question is, you were not talking in tongues in the biblical sense of the term, it was nothing more than nonsense syllables trying to fill in the gaps that your mind created while experiencing a nightmare that was very disturbing.

 

[guanophore]

For the sake of brevity, I'll avoid laying out the dots and trying to connect them.

Speaking in tongues has been discarded

I am asking you what is the basis you have for declaring this gift “discarded”. You have clearly discarded it, and believe that this is right and proper. On what foundation have you thrown out this gift of the Holy Spirit?

because at the time of Paul its purpose has been used up.

What is the proof of this assertion?

What makes you think that the gifts of God can be “used up”?

What was the purpose of speaking in tongues? **To preach the gospel**. Hasn't the Roman Catholic Church done a more effective job of preaching the gospel through the Euchrist?

There are many varieties of tongues, and many purposes. One of these is about preaching, yes.

The Eucharist is not to be separated from the other gifts of the Holy Spirit.

 

[guanophore]

this is my first time here and this interests me because abiut 2 years ago i was going through alot of problems with my husband and his family and one night i had a horrific dream, more like a nightmare anyway in my dream i was fighting with i thought it was the devil, i never saw him but i had the horrified sense of that was who it was, while i was sleeping started crying, mouning and my husband said i was talking in tongues, he could not understand what i was saying, but when i woke up i remembered the dream down to every detail, how could someone talk in tongues if they have never did it before and what could it mean, this has bothered me for so long. can anyone tell me

This is not uncommon, to have dreams with evil content or to fight spiritual battles within the dreamscape.

While in a dream state, our waking logical thinking mind is asleep, and the unconscious manifests content that we usually keep repressed. There is constantly a spiritual battle going on within ourselves, and often this battle is manifested in nightmares.

We also have within us the Spirit of God, preserving and protecting us. We may not know how to pray or to stand up against the evil, but the Spirit of God within us knows.

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 that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words. 27 And God, who searches the heart, knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

When we pray like this, our mind is unfruitful. 1 Cor 14:13-14
14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unproductive.

This is why it can happen when we are asleep. I have had many similar experiences.

 

[guanophore]

Did your husband interprete your ‘talking in tongues’ to mean you believe in the resurrection?

From a biblical perspective, ‘talking in tongues’ **had **(past tense highlighted intentionally) to do with preaching the gospel – 1 Cor 15:3 For I (Paul) delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

Having stated that ‘talking in tongues’ had a specific purpose for a specific time, my answer to your question is, you were not talking in tongues in the biblical sense of the term, it was nothing more than nonsense syllables trying to fill in the gaps that your mind created while experiencing a nightmare that was very disturbing.

Such an interpretation would come from a person who denies the living presence of God in the Soul of the believer. Such a rendering also denies the Holy Scripture.

Phil 2:13
13 for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

God does not stop working within us just because we are asleep. In fact, He can often get more done when our rational mind is not blocking us!

The form of praying in tongues referred to here is a private prayer language that is not used for preaching but to build up the believer.

1 Cor 14:2-3
2 For those who speak in a tongue do not speak to other people but to God; for nobody understands them, since they are speaking mysteries in the Spirit.

They are not meant to be understood by others.

 

[fewnotmany]

Such an interpretation would come from a person who denies . . . .

Now that the ‘fewnotmany is the anti-christ’ card has been played, I fail to see any intellectual value in continuing this discussion. guanophore, best wishes in all your endeavors.

 

[Lepanto]

I am asking you what is the basis you have for declaring this gift “discarded”. You have clearly discarded it, and believe that this is right and proper. On what foundation have you thrown out this gift of the Holy Spirit?

What is the proof of this assertion?

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, not on those who question it.

 

[guanophore]

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, not on those who question it.

The claim was made that the gift was “discarded”. I am asking for some “reason”.

 

[fewnotmany]

I am asking you what is the basis you have for declaring this gift “discarded”. You have clearly discarded it, and believe that this is right and proper. On what foundation have you thrown out this gift of the Holy Spirit?

For the sake of clarifying my previous statement, I did not say that the gift of the Holy Spirit is discarded. I stated that the vehicle of communicating the gift fo the Holy Spirit via ‘speaking in tongues’ is discarded.

Your posts would be less offensive if you prefixed your statements with, ‘if I understand you correctly, are you saying . . .’

 

[guanophore]

For the sake of clarifying my previous statement, I did not say that the gift of the Holy Spirit is discarded. I stated that the vehicle of communicating the gift fo the Holy Spirit via ‘speaking in tongues’ is discarded.

Your posts would be less offensive if you prefixed your statements with, ‘if I understand you correctly, are you saying . . .’

Well, I beg many pardons if I have been offensive. I should not respond in like kind, just because I consider the spurning of the gifts of the Holy Spirit offensive. This is not humility , the fruit of the Spirit whose gift you have discarded.

However, you still did not answer my question. On what basis have you discarded this gift of the Holy Spirit?

 

[fewnotmany]

On what basis have you discarded ‘speaking in tongues as a’ gift of the Holy Spirit?

First off, in order to properly deconstruct what ‘speaking in tongues’ ment at the time Paul was writing about it to the Corinthians, one must start with defining the words.

The English translated word ‘tongue’ is a King James, 17th century, hold out that conveys the idea of ‘foreign language’ or ‘dialect’.

For example, let’s see the word as it is used in:

1 Cor. 13:8 -
Love never fails; but if {there are gifts of} prophecy, they will be done away; if {there are} tongues, they will cease; if {there is} knowledge, it will be done away.

tongues - from the original greek word Glossa (gloce-sah)

From which we get our word glossary.

///////

From Wikipedia’s glossary,

A glossary is a list of terms in a particular domain of knowledge with the definitions for those terms. Traditionally, a glossary appears at the end of a book and includes terms within that book which are either newly introduced or at least uncommon.

A bilingual glossary is **a list of terms in one language which are defined in a second language **or glossed by synonyms (or at least near-synonyms) in another language.

In a more general sense, a glossary contains explanations of concepts relevant to a certain field of study or action.

/////*/

Hence, the word glossa, as Paul originally intended it, had a specific meaning. That is, people filled with the Holy Spirit were speaking in their own languages and dialects about the Gospel and they were being easily understood by others that traditionally didn’t understand their ‘foreign tongue’.

In the interest of not getting lost in the white noise, would you agree with what I’ve stated to this point?

 

[runandsew]

I have heard from two different sources, one Catholic and one non-Catholic that there was a priest who spoke in “tongues”. He made a sound like “dot - dit - dot - dot - dit”. This sounds like jibberish, until they found out that it was actually a language of a very remote tribe in Africa whom most of the world including this priest had never heard of.

fewtomany: if you are going to use the passage 1 Cor. 13:8, then you would have to say that all knowledge has ceased also.
That passage is saying that they will end at the end times when all is made perfect and they are no longer needed. Paul was not saying that they would end in his times. You are reading into the text your preconceived notions.

 

[guanophore]

First off, in order to properly deconstruct what ‘speaking in tongues’ ment at the time Paul was writing about it to the Corinthians, one must start with defining the words.

In the interest of not getting lost in the white noise, would you agree with what I’ve stated to this point?

I agree that this is one valid manifestation of the gift of tongues, yes.

I have heard from two different sources, one Catholic and one non-Catholic that there was a priest who spoke in “tongues”. He made a sound like “dot - dit - dot - dot - dit”. This sounds like jibberish, until they found out that it was actually a language of a very remote tribe in Africa whom most of the world including this priest had never heard of.

Does this mean that you don’t believe the gift “ceased”?

if you are going to use the passage 1 Cor. 13:8, then you would have to say that all knowledge has ceased also.
That passage is saying that they will end at the end times when all is made perfect and they are no longer needed. Paul was not saying that they would end in his times. You are reading into the text your preconceived notions.

Yes, I agree. I am still curious about why fewtoomany thinks that the gifts and knowledge have ceased. I have heard some Baptists teach that this occurred when the NT was written, as they consider the NT “the perfect” that has come.

 

[runandsew]

I have had discussions with a baptist friend who argued that ‘the perfect’ meant the New Testament.
Her pastor, who she claims is the best Greek scholar in America, say’s that it should read “the perfect thing”, that the perfect is not a person but a thing. I guess she had previously thought that the ‘perfect’ that Paul mentioned was Jesus, and not the perfect that will come at the end times, as in a new earth and a new heaven.

I don’t believe that they have ceased, but I don’t believe that every charismatic or pentecostal is speaking in tongues either.
I think the gift is still around, but not as common as one would expect considering what they see on TV.

Personally, I think that the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit are like a prescription drug, and I see a lot of people abusing these ‘drugs’ and becoming addicted to the spiritual high they provide.
I liken it to spiritual drug abuse.

 

[Wirraway]

Al asosereah du deosficnaquidanto a o biffle. Burtondo aie harvickgordon.

 

[fewnotmany]

fewtomany: if you are going to use the passage 1 Cor. 13:8,. . . .

In the interest of avoiding the white noise that your statement is attempting to create, would you be so kind as to either agree or disagree with what I’ve stated regarding the definition of the word ‘tongues’ in my previous post.

 

[runandsew]

In the interest of avoiding the white noise that your statement is attempting to create, would you be so kind as to either agree or disagree with what I’ve stated regarding the definition of the word ‘tongues’ in my previous post.

Though not all Christians agree, many think that tongues would be speaking in foreign languages which you previously didn’t know, while others believe that it is the language of the angels.
I tend to think that it is speaking in a foreign language.
But that doesn’t mean that they ceased to exist after the time of Paul, since they have always been around in church history, not very often, but still around. If they had been never spoken from the time of Paul until the last hundred years with the pentecostal movement, I might agree with you, but they had not disappeared, there have been several saints who have spoken in tongues through out the church age.
When I watch Benny Hinn and the alike on TBN, I don’t believe that is actual tongues, I think there are a lot of people fooling themselves.

 

[jcrichton]

Did you mean these ladies were the ones who were insisting that others pray in tongues, or were the ones who being told to pray in tongues?

*Hi, Chris!

I meant to say that the display of superiority was felt by many, not just my self; that some who felt were being coerced/demeaned were either tearful (tears running) or later confided that they did not want to continue in that parish.

Also, although you don’t consider yourself more mature or more spiritual, when you pray for their enlightenment (even if that prayer is silent) they might pick up on that “vibe” and think you were considering yourself more spiritual. I think sometimes that same thing happens when someone who does speak in tongues runs into some who does not. The tongue-speaker may not in any way think he or she is more spiritual, but the other person may feel or assume that this is the tongue-speaker’s attitude. This can especially be true if the tongue-speaker believes the gift is available to everyone.

I do not go into a prayer session right there and there… I simply keep them in my prayers; from time to time I find just such individuals online–when we come to an impass I simply tell them that I will pray for them; if they are particularly obstinately bent against the Church or the Holy Scriptures I might say something to the effect “may the Holy Spirit enlighten you…”

I understand your comparison… but I spoke on my experience where the “elite” spills out from the persons requesting not only acceptance of their “Gift” but would insist that all others must also speak in tongues; they equate the lack of conforming to lack of faith or to Christian immaturity.

By the way, the jury is out with me on whether or not tongues is available for everyone. A reading of 1 Cor 12 would lead one to say “no.” And, I, in a non-pressure way, have prayed for people to be both filled with the Spirit and prayed for the gift of tongues over people, where neither have spoken in tongues. These people genuinely desired the gift, and I really didn’t think they did anything to block it. I know there are those who would say I am incorrect, and that the gift is available to all who ask for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. However, in the scripture sections relating to being filled with the Spirit, there are a variety of manifestations when one is filled, with some instances when tongues are not mentioned.

I think that part of the problem is when we make demands… St. Paul says “…are all prophets, are all Apostles…” and “…only One Spirit Who Gives all according to His Will…” when we forget this… we wallow in error. As for the manisfestation of the Gift of tongues, it was a visible sign that was necessary during the inception (coming out if you will) of the Church–though it is not necessary now, it has never ceased to be a Gift since the Parusia is still to come; only then, as Paul tells us, will only Love remain!

On the other hand, I think sometimes we do block ourselves from receiving gifts God has to offer because we have a preconceived prejudice about that particular gift. (Prophecy and tongues are two that come to mind). Many times I have heard people say, “I really wouldn’t want THAT gift.” I have a feeling (just my theory) that more would speak in tongues or prophesy if more were not prejudiced against those gifts. I want to guard my heart against that type of attitude. I want anything God desires to give me. He tells me to eagerly desire spirtual gifts, and I do eagerly desire them. He has given me a measure of some of the gifts at different times during my ministry. He has also declined to give me some gifts that I have asked for. That’s HIS business. He’s God! My business is to desire gifts I can use to express His love and to build up the Church, and to gratefully accept whatever graces Jesus gives me.

My perspective is that we (Catholics and humanity in general) reject God’s Call (Vocation, Ministry, Gifts) because we do not want to humble ourselves to Him and Obey ("…if you Love Me you would Obey my Commandment/keep my Word…"); we want creature comforts rather than the Creator’s Friendship: the first offers instant gratifications while the latter demands complete dependence, self-sacrifice, and Hope (Trust in God not in ourselves or the world). As you attest, God’s Gifts come to us not to enhance our human abilities/persona but to fulfill God’s determination (part of the Salvific Plan).

Angel, it sure has been fun talking to you about this. Thanks for breaking me in doing these forum things. I’m new to this! Actually, pretty new to the Catholic Church. I came into full communion August 4, 2007. It has been great!!!

I am glad that your experience continues to be fulfilling; sorry for my delay in responding; I will do my best to keep up…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I see your point but if you read Acts 32 - 42 it is interesting that just after the first Pentecost, Peter inspired by the Holy Spirit preached to a large group of peple of different origins,in fact when he addressed them he said fellow Jews and the residents of Jerusalem, and there would have been believers and non believers as it is said that over 3000 people were sdded to the Church that day arising from the preaching of Peter inspired by the Holy Spirit

*…yes, but there is a difference between “manifestation” of the Holy Spirit and “imparting” of the Holy Spirit; Jesus warned that the other Paraclete would come only to the Disciples because the world did not know Him and could not know Him–only the Believers were to be given the Holy Spirit; hence His Command that they should go and Preach and Baptize!

…when these were added to the Church it was through a manifestation of the Holy Spirit (through the Apostles) and their willingness to receive the Gospel; St. Paul’s admonished that we seek the Gifts but that he himself would rather preach to convict the novice/non-Believers. Again, I am not suggesting that Yahweh God cannot chose an ignorant (spiritually) person, if He desires to reveal Himself through that individual; i.e.: the Child Jesus was announced to non-Jews (Magi) who traveled from far East to meet Him; Caiphas pronounced the prophecy of Christ’s Sacrifice for Israel and the whole of mankind even though he himself was not consciously aware of the gravity of his words…

Maran atha!

Angel*

 

[jcrichton]

Some are blessed with Spiritual gifts,some are called to Holy orders, but not all are blessed this way and I would like to share with you this extract from Corinthians"1 Cor. 12,31.13,1-13.
Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts. But I shall show you a
still more excellent way.
If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a
resounding gong or a clashing cymbal.
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all
knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have
love, I am nothing.
If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may
boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, (love) is not pompous, it
is not inflated,
it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not
quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury,
it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth.
It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all
things.
Love never fails. If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing;
if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing.
For we know partially and we prophesy partially,
but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.
When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as
a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things.
At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At
present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known.
So faith, hope, love remain, these three; but the greatest of these is
love.
This says it all

I wholeheartedly concur!

Maran atha!

Angel*

 

[jcrichton]

1 Cor 14:5
5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues…

*Hi!

…I have a little problem with this translation… it seems to suggest that St. Paul is actually advocating that all Believers speak in tongues; yet, it is clear by the remaining text on this verse that St. Paul would rather that we all prophesy (preach intelligibly).

Maran atha!

Angel*