Speaking in Tongues

[guanophore]

The Didache (written between 80 A.D. and 110 A.D.) - Chapter 11. Concerning Teachers, Apostles, and Prophets. - …

Where in any of these passages do you see any reference to the gift of tongues?

The Shepherd of Hermas (A.D. 110) Mandate 11 - "1[43]:5…

None in this one, either

 

[guanophore]

**Irenaeus - Against Heresies (Book II, Chapter 32) 180AD** - "Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, [scattered] throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and which she exerts day by day for the benefit of the Gentiles, neither practising deception upon any, nor taking any reward Acts 8:9, 18 from them [on account of such miraculous interpositions]. For as she has received freely Matthew 10:8 from God, freely also does she minister [to others]."

Nothing in here about tongues either.

Irenaeus - Against Heresies (Book II, Chapter 32) - “5. Nor does she perform anything by means of angelic invocations, or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, she has been accustomed to work miracles for the advantage of mankind, and not to lead them into error. If, therefore, the name of our Lord Jesus Christ even now confers benefits [upon men], and cures thoroughly and effectively all who anywhere believe in Him…”

Nothing about tongues here, either. What is your goal? Are you trying to use these passages to support the idea of speaking in tongues?

Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book II, 32:4 (190 A.D.) - “For some (Christians do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe and join themselves to the church.” DELIVERANCE is also implied to be done by Christians in Book II, 31:2.

Yes, but it is off topic in this thread.

Justin Martyr, Second Apology, Ch. 8 (153 A.D.) - This apology was addressed to the Roman Senate.

** Justin Martyr, Second Apology, Ch. 6** - “And now you (Roman Senate) can learn this from what is under your own observation. For numberless demoniacs throughout the whole world, and in your city, many of our Christian men exorcising them in the Name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, have healed and do heal, rendering helpless and driving the demons out of men, though they could not be cured by all the other exorcists, and those who used incantations and drugs.”

This does not reference the gift of tongues either.

**Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew, Ch. 30 (150 A.D.) ** - “For we call Him (Jesus) Helper and Redeemer, the power of whose name even the demons do fear; and at this day, when they are exorcised in the Name of Jesus Christ, they are overcome.”

Or this.

**Tatian, Address of Tatian to the Greeks, Ch. 16 (160 A.D.) **

It seems like you have garnered a collection of excerpts of the Fathers, but nothing of what you have posted here is related to the topic.

**Theophilus, Theophilus to Autolycus, Book II. 8 (160-180 A.D.) ** - Theophilus is refuting the false teachings of Homer and Hesiod who were famous Greek poets. "…

Contrary to what you may think, this thread is not about exorcism or prophesy.

 

[guanophore]

firstmode.

i couldnt read everything, it was too long. but doesnt these Scriptures speaks of teachers, prophets, deacons, and apostles only? then, why is the laity being the ones claim such things?

None of these are scriptures. They are writings of the early church fathers. None of them pertain to the thread topic, either. I think firstmode is just using this thread as a forum to promote the Assembly of God agenda.

The HS gives gifts to EVERYONE. Each baptized person has gifts that are to be used for the building up of the Body of Christ. From the early days, priests and deacons were sought from among those who demonstrated strong gifts.

 

[guanophore]

1st century

“Writers of the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas [two inspirational books used widely in the early church] witness so much charismatic activity they find it necessary to distinguish between true and false prophets. At about the same time, the writer of Pseudo-Barnabas suggests prophetic ministry is normative in the church.”

The Didache is a liturgical manual that was written for the clergy. It was not “widely” used among the laity.

I guess what you are trying to prove with all these quotes is that charismatic or pentecostal gifts are normative in the early church.

I find it interesting that you pick and choose out of these writers just like you do with the NT. How is it that the passages on the authority of the bishops don’t apply to you? How about the passages on unity of the faith?

2nd century

“[Christian apologist] Justin Martyr argues that God has withdrawn the Spirit of prophecy and miracles from the Jews and has transferred it to the church as proof of her continued divine favor.

He also writes about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Did you miss that part?

 Irenaeus of Lyon describes the gifts of prophecy, discernment of spirits, and exorcism in his Gallic church, and even mentions that individuals have been raised from the dead. He warns against certain false Gnostics who fabricate spiritual gifts to win favor with the naïve.”

3rd century

“Origen of Alexandria says healings, exorcisms, and validating signs and wonders continue to be experienced in the church. Just as miracles and wonders added to the credibility of 1st-century apostles, so they continue to draw unbelievers into the Christian fold.”

4th century

“Augustine [of Hippo], in The City of God, reports contemporary divine healings and other miracles. These he links directly to the conversion of pagans.”

I still fail to see the connection with the thread topic.

10th-11th centuries

“Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022), perhaps the most famous Eastern [Orthodox] charismatic Christian, reports his most intimate spiritual experiences, which include a ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ accompanied by gifts of copious tears, compunction, and visions of God as light. [Burgess provides a resume of this influential leader’s life and teachings on p. 1112 of the Dictionary.]“

12th-14th centuries

“The sermons of Thomas Aquinas are frequently confirmed by miracles, and he often experiences ecstasy, especially in the last months of his life.

Bonaventure reports that Francis of Assisi, while an unskilled speaker, is empowered by the Holy Spirit while ministering. Wherever he goes, his sermons are accompanied with miracles of great power, including prophecy, casting out devils, and healing the sick. As a result, his hearers pay attention to what he says ‘as if an angel of the Lord was speaking.’”

“The sermons of Thomas Aquinas are frequently confirmed by miracles, and he often experiences ecstasy, especially in the last months of his life. 16th century

Still no relation to thread topic.

“Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits), frequently receives divine communication in visions. He also experiences a gift of tears—often in such abundance that he cannot control himself—and the gift of loquela, which a few modern scholars associate with today’s charismatic phenomenon of sung glossolalia [tongues].”

Is that right? which modern scholars are those?

17th century

“Jansenists, belonging to a radical Augustinian movement in the Roman Catholic Church from 1640 to 1801 [its most famed adherent was the French scientist and apologist Blaise Pascal], become known for their signs and wonders, spiritual dancing, healings, and prophetic utterances. Some reportedly speak in unknown tongues and understand foreign languages in which they are addressed.”

Seems like you are quoting a book here. Care to say which one?

18th century

“Seraphim of Sarov (1759-1833), the Russian Orthodox charismatic leader, asserts that the goal of the Christian life is the reception of the Holy Spirit. Seraphim’s ‘evidence’ for a baptism of the Holy Spirit is a transfiguration experience—being transformed, while still in the flesh, into divine light. Seraphim also is remembered for a gift of healing.”

Not related to thread topic either, unless it refutes that the use of spiritual gifts apart from transformation into holiness is not from God.

 

[mphpearson]

Nov 12 2010

Wonderful to have all those scripture references for “Gift of Tongues”.

Please do you have any commentary on discerning or otherwise ascertaining the difference between genuine biblical “tongues” and what is possible today using computers and chips???

Thank you for your help MPP

 

[ProVobis]

Paul did not need to speak foreign languages. Greek was the common tongue throughout the civilised world. All the NT was written Greek, and even the OT was translated into Greek.

Maybe not.

"Most modern scholars believe that the New Testament was written almost entirely in Greek. There are a few exact-language quotes from Christ in the Gospels, such as Mk 5:41 and Mk 15:34, which are preserved in the original Aramaic. Christ most often used Aramaic during His teaching Ministry. Some modern scholars think that Matthew may have originally been written in Aramaic. But, as for the rest of the New Testament, most scholars think it was written almost entirely in Greek.

“On the contrary, a strong argument can be made that the New Testament was written using several different languages: Hebrew, Latin, Greek, and Aramaic. The authors of the books of the New Testament wrote in different regions of the world, for different groups of Christians, who spoke and read and wrote in different languages. I believe that most of the New Testament was originally written in languages other than Greek.”

…

"Each author wrote more or less independently of the others. Each did not realize that he was writing a part of one infallible Sacred Scripture, which would be called the New Testament. Each author probably was familiar with, and able to use, more than one language. The common languages of that time and place were Hebrew, Latin, Greek, and Aramaic.

"A writer of any book of the New Testament would have to chose a language which would be understood by his audience and which he himself could speak and write fluently. These two criteria were indispensable. What author would write any work in a language which his intended audience could not understand? What author could write a work in a language in which he himself was not fluent?

“Now, what are the odds that each and every author, writing independently, would happen to write in the same language and always in Greek? Was every author of the New Testament fluent in reading and writing Greek? Did every Christian in every church understand Greek well? If not, then what reason would the authors have for writing in Greek only? Why would Paul, when writing to different cities, in different areas of the world, to people who spoke different languages, always write in Greek? Would he not rather write in whatever language was common to those he was addressing? Why would Mark, writing for the Christians of Rome, write in Greek? Would he not rather write to them in their own first language, Latin, a language he learned during his many years among them? Why would Matthew, writing for Christians who were of Hebraic descent and who were converts from Judaism, write in Greek? Would he not rather address them in their own language?”

…

more at catholicplanet.com/TSM/NT-introduction.htm

 

[mphpearson]

Nov 12 2010

Wonderful to have all those scripture references for “Gift of Tongues”.

Please do you have any commentary on discerning or otherwise ascertaining the difference between genuine biblical “tongues” and what is possible today using computers and chips???

Thank you for your help MPP

**I would like to add that I am in no way questioning a true gift of tongues, but would like to know any tips with regard to discerning spirits other than the rules of St Ignatius and others for doing that. **

I have come across priests who substitute the word “spirits” for “the Holy Spirit” and “Lords” for “Lord” and other changed words at Mass. And I have encountered some priests on three continents who are not careful about the words of the Mass.

Have you had a conversation about this somewhere sometime? I have very little time on the computer so may not be able to re - comment? I presume this might come under the “so-called avant- garde priests” who were referred to in the Survey for the Year of the Eucharist, where we were asked to say which priests did this and why? However, some (most?) Bishops supressed the survey so few of us were able to contribute responses. I heard of it very late. MPP Nov 15 2010

 

[The_Harvester]

I do not wish to cause division or offense, but I believe speaking in tongues is alive and well today. My own roommate’s father witnessed someone who spoke in a Vietnamese dialect during a prayer meeting and he understood it perfectly. The speaker had no knowledge of the language, and what the speaker said was glorifying God. My roommate’s father became a Christian believer from this. The apostles were marked as speaking in tongues because men of many nations were in the area and could tell by the apostles’ Galilean or other accents that the language they were speaking was not native to them, and that is why they were amazed that this was happening - they spoke with languages unknown to them, but did so perfectly as they gave God praise.

I practice speaking in tongues as something to build up the spirit in personal life and within proper order in prayer meetings. We do not jump around or roll on the floor, we are asked to do so, and it is simply speaking, moving our lips and tongue to make words or sound as inspired, and then stopping, just as if someone asks you to speak in Spanish or Japanese and the language was known to you, you would speak it forth without rolling around or getting crazy. We do not know what the translation is while speaking, but if we are asked to interpret, we trust that God has told us the interpretation as we bring it forth as it comes to mind. It is generally a message of blessing from God pertinent to the people present.

 

[guanophore]

Welcome to CAF, Harvester. You are new here, so you probably don’t know that you have posted on a very old thread. MOst likely, everyone who was on it has moved on by now.

I do not wish to cause division or offense, but I believe speaking in tongues is alive and well today. My own roommate’s father witnessed someone who spoke in a Vietnamese dialect during a prayer meeting and he understood it perfectly. The speaker had no knowledge of the language, and what the speaker said was glorifying God. My roommate’s father became a Christian believer from this. The apostles were marked as speaking in tongues because men of many nations were in the area and could tell by the apostles’ Galilean or other accents that the language they were speaking was not native to them, and that is why they were amazed that this was happening - they spoke with languages unknown to them, but did so perfectly as they gave God praise.

You are not giving offense. The Charismatic gifts were given by the HS to the Catholic Church at Pentecost. St. Paul, who was a Catholic, writes to the Catholic Church in Corinth about them.

I practice speaking in tongues as something to build up the spirit in personal life and within proper order in prayer meetings. We do not jump around or roll on the floor, we are asked to do so, and it is simply speaking, moving our lips and tongue to make words or sound as inspired, and then stopping, just as if someone asks you to speak in Spanish or Japanese and the language was known to you, you would speak it forth without rolling around or getting crazy. We do not know what the translation is while speaking, but if we are asked to interpret, we trust that God has told us the interpretation as we bring it forth as it comes to mind. It is generally a message of blessing from God pertinent to the people present.

I am glad that you are using your gift in an orderly manner, according to the Scriptures.

What brings you here to Catholic Answers?

 

[grannymh]

Hi everyone. I am wondering about speaking in tongues. Is it a common gift today or is it a rare gift that only a few people get? I am not speaking about praying in tongues. I am talking about speaking in tongues. you know, the kind where an interpretation is needed according to the Bible? According to Scripture Catholic, speaking in tongues is a rare gift. What do you think?

scripturecatholic.com/tongues.html

From what I read on CAF, it is rare that Catholics understand the classical gift of Speaking in Tongues as listed by St. Paul. This gift is also considered as a ministry to the Church.

I do not have any statistics about this gift. However, it can be considered rare because it requires serious preparation, instruction and most of all discernment. On the other hand, in a geographical area where people study the gifts of the Holy Spirit and are open to them, the gift of Speaking in Tongues with its companion gift Interpretation of Tongues can be common.

Note: I only read part of your link. However, it was a tad confusing since there are two distinct gifts involving tongues. In my humble opinion, the interpretation of
1 Corinthians 13:8 was somewhat unusual. But since I did not read everything, I cannot comment.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[grannymh]

I do not wish to cause division or offense, but I believe speaking in tongues is alive and well today. My own roommate’s father witnessed someone who spoke in a Vietnamese dialect during a prayer meeting and he understood it perfectly. The speaker had no knowledge of the language, and what the speaker said was glorifying God. My roommate’s father became a Christian believer from this. The apostles were marked as speaking in tongues because men of many nations were in the area and could tell by the apostles’ Galilean or other accents that the language they were speaking was not native to them, and that is why they were amazed that this was happening - they spoke with languages unknown to them, but did so perfectly as they gave God praise.

I practice speaking in tongues as something to build up the spirit in personal life and within proper order in prayer meetings. We do not jump around or roll on the floor, we are asked to do so, and it is simply speaking, moving our lips and tongue to make words or sound as inspired, and then stopping, just as if someone asks you to speak in Spanish or Japanese and the language was known to you, you would speak it forth without rolling around or getting crazy. We do not know what the translation is while speaking, but if we are asked to interpret, we trust that God has told us the interpretation as we bring it forth as it comes to mind. It is generally a message of blessing from God pertinent to the people present.

Welcome to CAF.
What you have written speaks the truth. Thank you.

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16&17