Speaking in Tongues

[guanophore]

See to me though, I think that the ability to speak multiple languages, the spiritual gift of Speaking a language you don’t know and other scenarios get mixed together and seen as evidence of “Unknown Tongues.”

This may be, but that does not invalidate the gift. Abuse is a problem, certainly, but it does not nullify the real. There are many abuses of the LIturgy, also,but it does not invalidate the real liturgy.

The spiritual gift to communicate with others in a language that is not known to the self is one variety of tongues. The ability to pray in the spirit in a language that one does not know is another variety of tongues.

It is true that St. Paul had experiences of the Spirit praying through him but I don’t see that as being related to the experience that modern Protestants and Catholics are calling Unknown Tongues.

I suppose it depends upon what they are talking about. When Paul wrote “I would that you all pray in tongues” he did not mean that it should happen in Church creating a chaos of gibberish. That variety of tongues is for private prayer. It is frequently misused in public meetings.

Usually when the Early Church Fathers speak of tongues they mean tongues of another language, and many seemed to be of a mind that it was for the spreading of the Gospel.

Yes, however, the private prayer is for the strengthening of the individual believer. It is not for preaching, or for communication with other believers (with an interpretation)…

However when we see references to broken jargon that no one understood it is usually in reference to heretics like Montanus or the Moravians.

Tongues can certainly be misused by heretics.

I don’t know, as a former Evangelical I saw nothing but destructive things pour forth from the Charismatic movement. Indeed the Charismatic movement has taken the slow leak on the ship of Protestantism and has created a full fledged flooding. I’m just deeply concerned that it exists in the Church now.

I am sorry you have had such a bad experience. I think it is because there is inadequate shepherding and teaching. All such gifts must be submitted to the authority of the Church. When that authority is not recognized, or people think the Bible is there authority, abuses run rampant.

 

[guanophore]

Show mew how what I wrote is not consistant with Romans 7.

You wrote that the old man is destroyed. If this were true, then there would be no conflict or struggle such as the one he describes.

I am asserting that there was a time in the history of the CC where torture and death and the threat of torture and death forced people to believe what they were pushing.

Please show some evidence of this assertion. If you cannot show any, then we will be left to believe that you made it up, or got it from some other anti-Catholic source.

I suggest you study your own history. Before I was to belong to a sect, I would search out, from beginning to end to discern if of God or not of God. How would I do this? By using the Word of God and seeing if the sect adds or takes away from the Word of God.

You would do this because you did not have the benefit of being baptized as an infant, perhaps. You also might do this because you do not realize that it is your perceptions of the Word of God that are in control. You may not realize that the Church came before the Bible. You also don’t appear to realize that the Catholic Church is not a “sect”. Sects are those that have broken away from the Church founded by Christ.

Why do you attempt to steal the glory of God? We have the scriptures because of God and because of men who yielded to his spirit.

The Glory of God cannot be stolen, heis. The New Testament is a product of the Catholic Church. It was written by Catholics, inspired by the HS. If you think the history of Christianity is so important, when you study it, you will learn that it is a Catholic Collection of Catholic documents.

This is what is say. You see it, and read it, but do not understand. There are three baptisms spoken of in scripture, but only one can bring us into the family of God. There is only one baptism that saves a man.

Actually, it is not I who say it, but the Scripture itself. One Baptism means One. Certainly it is manifested in many different forms. I agree that there is only one baptism that saves. This has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church.

 Yet, what are works if not done through Christ which comes by way of faith. What good is works if a man does it hoping to earn a reward when his only thought should be helping his brother out of the love in his heart which is of Christ.

That would be the difference between works of the flesh, and works of the Spirit.

You mean the CC don't you? For in your eyes, all the other churches in the world are in err?

Jesus only founded One Church, and with it, One Baptism. All who are baptized are members of His One Body, the Church.

I know it probably bothers you a lot that we consider you to be part of the Catholic Church, since you seem to hate Catholicism so much, however, to us, you are a separated brother.

 

[BRB1]

1 Cor. 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
,

For Heis & G-4 —

You both speak in ‘unknown’ tongues, not foreign languages unknown to yourselves. Heis uses the above verses to support speaking in tongues. However, St. Paul says the tongues he speaks are “groanings” … which CANNOT BE UTTERED.

What is a groan … which is not audibly spoken ? Perhaps Paul is suggesting here he is praying silently in the spirit … being led by the spirit in deep meditations … ‘groaning in silence’.

When I hear an foreign language unknown to me, I do appreciate a pattern and intelligent design to it … even though I can’t translate. Gibberish, I’d define as audible speech that is chaotic and not intelligible by anyone. So, Paul is not praying ‘gibberish’ … but, perhaps deep, silent emotional thoughts being expressed to God via mediations.

Its my premise that Paul’s tongues are not what you two are suggesting. G-4, my mentor, … set me straight on Paul’s teaching on subject.

 

[BRB1]

No, BRB1. The unknown tongue, or tongues of angels is not “gibberish”. The fact that others cannot understand it does not make it gibberish.

It is very arrogant to make the assumption that anything we cannot understand is “gibberish”. What hubris!

No … seriously trying to figure out Paul’s teachings. Gibberish is the right word here … and not being used in derogatory way.

Most of us haven’t spoken in tongues, in the same way you and Heis are suggesting here. But, we are curious and want to be sure we are not leaving something ‘on the table’ that is desired of God for us all.

 

[heiscominginthe]

guanophore;5461891]You wrote that the old man is destroyed. If this were true, then there would be no conflict or struggle such as the one he describes.

What is destroyed is the hold the old man has on us. Yet, we often fall back into ways of sin, allowing the old man or the flesh to influence or tempt us. Our sinful nature is what is destroyed and we have a new nature in Christ.

Please show some evidence of this assertion. If you cannot show any, then we will be left to believe that you made it up, or got it from some other anti-Catholic source.

It is not I who am under the influence of this religion, you are. Many have died by the hands of the CC and your denial of this only reveals your blindness to this religion. William Tysdale was strangled and burnt at the stake because of his disobedience to the CC. William believed every man, woman and child should be able to have access to scripture. I believe he was a martyr for the gospel of Jesus Christ.

You would do this because you did not have the benefit of being baptized as an infant, perhaps. You also might do this because you do not realize that it is your perceptions of the Word of God that are in control. You may not realize that the Church came before the Bible. You also don’t appear to realize that the Catholic Church is not a “sect”. Sects are those that have broken away from the Church founded by Christ.

That is why I believe the CC is a sect, for it has broken off from the teachings of the true church who stand on the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Glory of God cannot be stolen, heis. The New Testament is a product of the Catholic Church. It was written by Catholics, inspired by the HS. If you think the history of Christianity is so important, when you study it, you will learn that it is a Catholic Collection of Catholic documents.

The scriptures was written by the apostles, not the CC. The apostles are who set up the church throughout the regions. Do we have to once again go back and reveal when the Church was changed from being called the church to being called the CC. This occured many, many years after the death of the apostles.

Actually, it is not I who say it, but the Scripture itself. One Baptism means One. Certainly it is manifested in many different forms. I agree that there is only one baptism that saves. This has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church.

And this is why I wonder of your stand in the faith. If you cannot understand the milk of the Word, something is closing your eyes to it. For there is only one baptism that saves a man and it is not the baptism of water.

Jesus only founded One Church, and with it, One Baptism. All who are baptized are members of His One Body, the Church.

I know it probably bothers you a lot that we consider you to be part of the Catholic Church, since you seem to hate Catholicism so much, however, to us, you are a separated brother.

I do not hate people period. What I do hate is the doctrines that are of men and not of God.

As for being part of the church, all regardless of where they fellowship who have been born again share that baptism that saves a man.

 

[BRB1]

That is why I believe the CC is a sect, for it has broken off from the teachings of the true church who stand on the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Now thats pure Gibberish ! Makes those of us reading such nonsense wonder whose spirit is inspiring your tongue for comprehension/apologetics.

 

[heiscominginthe]

Now thats pure Gibberish ! Makes those of us reading such nonsense wonder whose spirit is inspiring your tongue for comprehension/apologetics.

As for the Holy Spirit, if the milk on which is preach is spoiled, how much more the meat.

John 3 is the cornerstone of the faith. If a religion cannot comprehend this which is one of the most important scriptures in the bible, which is the milk of the Word, how can one speak on matters of the meat of the word?

I keep hearing the same thing over and over, explanations that completely change from what is written to the interpretation of what is written. Ingoring completely what was written.

The point is if one can’t get the part on salvation right, how must more damaging is the rest of the teachings?

All I ask is that you read the Word of God, praying always the Lord lead you into all truth and ignore the teachings of men. Let God teach you, not men.

 

[guanophore]

For Heis & G-4 ---

You both speak in ‘unknown’ tongues, not foreign languages unknown to yourselves. Heis uses the above verses to support speaking in tongues. However, St. Paul says the tongues he speaks are “groanings” … which CANNOT BE UTTERED.

What is a groan … which is not audibly spoken ? Perhaps Paul is suggesting here he is praying silently in the spirit … being led by the spirit in deep meditations … ‘groaning in silence’.

Yes, this is also an authentic form of prayer in the Spirit. This is practiced more by the Eastern Rites, who do not use the Rosary or other forms of prayer as much as the contempletive silent “groaning” prayer.

When I hear an foreign language unknown to me, I do appreciate a pattern and intelligent design to it … even though I can’t translate. Gibberish, I’d define as audible speech that is chaotic and not intelligible by anyone.

Your perception that it is chaotic and not intellible by anyone does not make it so. What makes you think the tongues of angels would be intelligible to humans? I do agree, though, I have also heard many abuses of so called tongues that are audible chaotic speech, barking, screaching, and all manner of crazies. I maintain that none of these invalidates the Gifts of God.

So, Paul is not praying 'gibberish' ... but, perhaps deep, silent emotional thoughts being expressed to God via mediations.

I do think Paul did this kind of prayer, as well as praying psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, and praying in tongues. We find testimonies to all these in his writings. He truly seemed to be a person who “prayed without ceasing”.

Its my premise that Paul’s tongues are not what you two are suggesting. G-4, my mentor, … set me straight on Paul’s teaching on subject.

What type of prayer is it ithat prays with the spirit, leaving the mind unfruitful?

1 Cor 14:14
14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.

Clearly this is verbal, and not the contempletive “groaning” described elsewhere.