Speaking in tongues

[diane.]

Just as a note to the above post -- mention was made in one of your posts that I am non-denominational. Yes, I did list myself on this forum under that faith category. I thought perhaps by doing so, it may lessen any barriers for conversation. But in fact, I am an ordained Pentecostal minister. But rather than the focus being on denomination, I see myself as one who is Pentecostal because of 'the experience' of the infilling of the Holy Spirit.
diane.

 

[Ken Behrens]

Diane, if I read you right, the audio I respond is not valid tongues (12:47) is not you at all, but the "woman babbling". The video is no longer here to check this, but I found it on youtube, thanks to your link. The one posted here, started at 11 minutes in. So the first thing I heard was the call-in woman, which you say is not you. A few minutes later, I heard a tape, at 17:38, which I now know from the earlier part of the tape, was you, and I stated I believed this to be authentic tongues.

We also appear to agree on theology. I have private recordings of group prayer in tongues that I have shared on Christian chat sites, to demonstrate the difference. I loved what you stated in the letter. It was right on the money for how it should be used. They were also recorded in the middle of prayer, and were never intended to be shared. I posted them only to encourage people who wished to receive the gift of tongues that the arguments against them from the cessationists are not valid.

I think it is really neat the way God brought this out in the order He did. I think you got your interesting conversation, and it's great to cap it off with the testimony you published today.

I looked at the five videos in the youtube channel. It's really neat to see your passion for building the Kingdom. But as far as putting a face to the name, only the one on the prosperity gospel gives a face, is that you? My wife and I (and my first wife who went home in 2012) have a lot of videos, writings, etc. at my website.

 

[diane.]

Diane, if I read you right, the audio I respond is not valid tongues (12:47) is not you at all, but the "woman babbling". The video is no longer here to check this, but I found it on youtube, thanks to your link. The one posted here, started at 11 minutes in. So the first thing I heard was the call-in woman, which you say is not you. A few minutes later, I heard a tape, at 17:38, which I now know from the earlier part of the tape, was you, and I stated I believed this to be authentic tongues.

We also appear to agree on theology. I have private recordings of group prayer in tongues that I have shared on Christian chat sites, to demonstrate the difference. I loved what you stated in the letter. It was right on the money for how it should be used. They were also recorded in the middle of prayer, and were never intended to be shared. I posted them only to encourage people who wished to receive the gift of tongues that the arguments against them from the cessationists are not valid.

I think it is really neat the way God brought this out in the order He did. I think you got your interesting conversation, and it's great to cap it off with the testimony you published today.

I looked at the five videos in the youtube channel. It's really neat to see your passion for building the Kingdom. But as far as putting a face to the name, only the one on the prosperity gospel gives a face, is that you? My wife and I (and my first wife who went home in 2012) have a lot of videos, writings, etc. at my website.

Thank you for your reply, Ken. We had no idea that when we posted the 'Speaking In Tongues' video on Christian Forum that it did not play in its entirety. I now understand why all the confusion. I believe my husband has now remedied that problem by reloading the video on the forum.

Yes, that is me in the False Teachers video. But again I'm somewhat confused. You mentioned that there are 5 videos on our channel. We have 14 videos on our YouTube channel to date, 5 of which are brief exhortations and/or rebukes given by me.

For some real inspiration, perhaps you could check out the 'Son of God' video. The photos of the cosmos are extraordinary, courtesy of the Hubbel space telescope.
diane.

 

[Ken Behrens]

Diane, aha!, there is a tiny arrow after #5. That gives me the rest of them. Yes, you are definitely broadening into a video production ministry. It is not only that video that has some very inspirational pictures. I noticed some nice ones on Who Lord, also. Ken

 

[diane.]

Diane, aha!, there is a tiny arrow after #5. That gives me the rest of them. Yes, you are definitely broadening into a video production ministry. It is not only that video that has some very inspirational pictures. I noticed some nice ones on Who Lord, also. Ken

Thank you, Ken.
Grace and peace,
diane.

 

[AlexDTX]

Good morning Ken and AlexDTX.

I hope that you both, and anyone else who may join the conversation, will have the patience to read this testimony and clarification. I do believe you will truly be inspired.

I have been away from this forum for the better part of a week, so I've not been up to speed as to what's been said. In the posting of my video, it was my desire to stimulate interesting conversation. I'm not sure that I have been particularly offended, but I do appreciate you, Alex, for coming to my defense, and I thank you, Ken, for your apology.

Ken, it seems possible that you did not listen to the video from start to finish. In John Oakley's preamble to the show, he reads a portion of a letter - my letter written to him accompanied with an audio tape of me speaking in tongues. In the letter I sent to him, I clearly identify myself as a pastor of a Pentecostal church. So, yes, to remove all doubt, I am a born-again, bible-believing, spirit-filled Christian, who has been a servant of the gospel of Jesus Christ for 35 years.

Allow me to give some context to the letter and tape sent to Mr. Oakley. As a pastor, Monday was typically my day off. I was at home sorting laundry and decided to turn the radio on. At that precise moment, John Oakley and a caller were having a rather lively dispute over the credibility of speaking in tongues. I, of course, listened with great interest. It was the way in which John Oakley ended the discussion with the caller that prompted me to be a witness, or perhaps an apologist for the veracity and power of God, the Holy Spirit.

I do not carelessly 'throw around' utterances in the spirit. But in this case, there seemed to be a great purpose for doing so. I felt very compelled. My husband and I went to our church, where we privately recorded me praying in the spirit. I then wrote the letter and mailed it off to Mr. Oakley, along with the tape. I felt that I had done what I was supposed to do and gave no further thought to it.

A whole month went by when, again, on a Monday I was at home and turned the radio on as I was puttering around the house. To my utter amazement, John Oakley was just beginning his show and giving his preamble as to what would be on his program over the next few hours. Shockingly, the first topic up for discussion was a letter and tape recording that he had received from a Pentecostal pastor. I could not believe my ears... mostly because I had stated in the letter that the content enclosed was not for public consumption. This was extraordinary and totally unanticipated. I quickly ran to get my recorder in order to tape the segment, thus the audio tape that I have shared with ChristianForum. I phoned my husband and a few other people, so they could tune in and listen in on the program.

As if this weren't enough, it seemed like the real reason behind the prompting to send the letter and audio was yet to reveal itself. Two weeks after the airing of my audio tape on CFRB, I received a phone call at my church office from a gentleman who said he needed very much to speak with someone from the church. He was not a Christian nor a churchgoer but said that something had happened recently and he was re-thinking 'God' and needed some questions answered. I asked him his name and where he lived and said that both my husband and I would be happy to meet with him and be of whatever help we could. It turns out that his address was just 10 minutes from our church. The day arrived for us to go to his home, we knocked on his door, he opened it and very warmly invited us in. We sat in his kitchen and he seemed a little rattled, nervous, but very excited. He proceeded to tell us how one day, a few weeks earlier, he was driving in his car and listening to the radio. He said, "I heard the most amazing thing and I can't get it out of my mind." He said, "I was listening to the John Oakley show and I heard a woman speaking in another language, an unknown language. I knew it was something from God. I need to know about this. Can you tell me anything about praying in tongues?"

You could have knocked me off my chair with a feather! I said to him, "I am that woman. It was I you heard, and yes, I can tell you about the Holy Spirit." We sat in this man's kitchen for 2 hours, answering his questions. It was stunning! It was supernatural! God had orchestrated a divine appointment through the simpleness of obedience; the obedience to write a letter and to send a sample of the truth along with that letter.

If it touched this one man in such a profound way, how many others did God reach that day??

I should give clarification. In the audio, you hear another woman, who is a call-in... this of course, is not me - she is just babbling.

I hope this testimony brings context and clarification to the audio.

If you have any interest in putting a face to a name or viewing any of our other short videos on various subjects, please go to our YouTube channel here.
diane.

Wow! What a great testimony. Thank you for the complete story. God bless you and your husband for your obedience.

 

[Aryeh]

I am going to watch the video.

Just perspective for my coming comment: I am not familiar with speaking in tongues other than seeing people say, "I SHOULDABOUGHTAHONDA" or some other unintelligible words in church.

It turned me off big time.

But, I have learned in study that one can speak in other languages that may sound ridiculous to those who aren't to receive the message, but is intelligible to the receiver (whether spirit or otherwise.) But, it doesn't have to be unintelligible.

For example, I can be in a crowd of 20 in which half speak English, a fourth speak Cantonese, and a few others speak other languages. If, for example, there is tongue to be delivered to someone in, say, Te Reo (which I don't speak,) I may hear myself speaking to him/her in our common language, while everyone else hears "gibberish."

Tongues, like many gifts of God, can be twisted and polluted by the enemy also.

(My next post will succinctly answer the OP.)

 

[diane.]

I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
diane.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The problem with trying to analyse tongues scientifically, or any other aspect of the Christian faith in a similar way, is that trying to come up with an intellectual analysis will always end up in a dead end with the end-result conclusion: "I do not know". This is because the intellect is part of the soul and not the spirit. If the scientist is not a Christian believer, his spirit is dead, therefore he cannot understand anything of God or His ways, because they come by revelation to the spirit. If the spirit is dead, there can be no receiving of revelation from God. So, all that results is useless debate and conjecture, without coming anywhere near the truth of the matter.

Access to the spirit comes through faith. Reading the Gospels and Acts, I see the accent is on believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that He rose from the dead. These cannot be understood through the intellect. These come by revelation Spirit to spirit. If a person's spirit is dead, he cannot believe that Jesus is the Son of God or that He rose from the dead.

To understand tongues through the intellect, or to make any type of judgment about whether a person is truly speaking in tongues or not is a useless and pointless exercise and can only end up in frustration and pointless debate which accomplishes nothing.

Tongues is not for public use; therefore if I hear anyone speaking in tongues as part of a secular radio broadcast set up to try and describe it, I would naturally assume that it is meaningless, especially to God because the person speaking is misusing the gift and is not praying to Him anyway. So God's attitude is, "I can safely ignore that!"
Tongues is a private prayer language that a believer prays when alone with God. God is the only One who hears and understands it. Using the gift that way puts the speaker well out of range of criticisers and others trying to use what is being said to prove it false. Only God, who knows the heart of the person praying in tongues can make the judgment about whether the tongues is true or false, and He certainly is not going to tell some secular scientist what He thinks. The response of Jesus to anyone, Christian or secular, who would ask Him would be: "What is that to you? Follow Me."

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I am going to watch the video.

Just perspective for my coming comment: I am not familiar with speaking in tongues other than seeing people say, "I SHOULDABOUGHTAHONDA" or some other unintelligible words in church.

It turned me off big time.

But, I have learned in study that one can speak in other languages that may sound ridiculous to those who aren't to receive the message, but is intelligible to the receiver (whether spirit or otherwise.) But, it doesn't have to be unintelligible.

For example, I can be in a crowd of 20 in which half speak English, a fourth speak Cantonese, and a few others speak other languages. If, for example, there is tongue to be delivered to someone in, say, Te Reo (which I don't speak,) I may hear myself speaking to him/her in our common language, while everyone else hears "gibberish."

Tongues, like many gifts of God, can be twisted and polluted by the enemy also.

(My next post will succinctly answer the OP.)

No doubt about you being turned off by what you heard. Speaking tongues like that in public is not what Paul taught about the use of tongues. It is a private and personal prayer language spoken only to God, except in circumstances when the Holy Spirit allows the speaker to speak publicly in a known language which others can understand - to give a supernatural proof that the gospel is real and true (and that is the only reason, because God is not in the business of any type of "Hollywood" demonstration to prove anything else!).

The trouble is with those who speak tongues in public without interpretation is that they have not read 1 Corinthians 14 closely to find out what Paul actually says about it. Or, they have decided that some type of "impression" they have got "in the spirit" has more authority than God's Word. Actually, that impression might actually come from a lying spirit rather than the Holy Spirit in order to discredit tongues, something that the devil hates and does all he can to stop people using it. When tongues is used correctly in private with God, who is the only One who understands it, it can be a mighty weapon against the enemy and can be the gateway to other powerful gifts of the Spirit being operated to draw people to Christ.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Through the viewing of this video, I hope to promote interesting dialogue. The video is 27 minutes long and is the audio recording of a lively discussion on one of Canada's leading secular radio stations, CFRB 1010 (currently newstalk1010). I am the initial voice you hear in the audio of one who speaks 'in tongues'. I would like to hear your views and what you think.
(Note: Our apologies. When initially posted, we did not realize that the video does not play in its entirety if embedded in the post. If you wish to view the video, click on "Speaking In Tongues" here. )
diane.

Someone speaking in tongues over secular radio is speaking nonsense and has no significance to God or anyone else. 1 Corinthians 14 proves that.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The OP asked what I think. I told them. I also explained why I think that, comparing to a musical performance. There is a field called sentics, which is hard science, and enables anyone, even a computer program, to analyze a recording of any sound made by a human lasting longer than a couple seconds, vocal or not, and determine to within a fair degree of certainty the underlying emotion being experienced at the time of producing the sound. There is no emotion revealed in the first example, but emotions such as are commonly experienced in prophecy and intercessory prayer in the second.

This type of analysis can't prove anything because it remains in the soulish intellect, while any gift of the Spirit is in the spirit which is accessed by faith and not by reason of any kind. Any scientific analysis would be just pure nonsense.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Many scientists are doing work analyzing some aspects of tongues. Not all scientists deny the spirit. SPEAKING IN TONGUES: Glossia and Xenoglossia. scientific studies

Many ministries are under attack by other ministries for their praying in tongues online, some who allegedly do it as "attention grabbers". I'll put a couple links; I have seen dozens). If such a statement is tantamount to saying someone is not a Christian, then the Body of Christ has a problem. You are welcome to report my post, and let the admins judge. But I think it is clear that a person need not have tongues to be a Christian, and I think anyone can babble, Christian or not. For all I know, the woman in fact has the real gift of tongues, and was using false tongues on purpose as a prank for the call in the show.

By the way, the woman never claims to be a Christian. And the rule here is against saying that another member is not a Christian if he/she claims to be by how he identifies in his bio.

http://www.libertyadvocate.com/Swaggart's False Tongues.htm
The False Gift of Tongues | 1 Cor 12, 14 | RayStedman.org

My view is that any type of scientific analysis of anything to do with God, His ways, and gifts, is pure nonsense, because God is a spirit, and His ways and gifts come through the Holy Spirit by revelation to genuine Christian believers who by faith believe what is written in the New Testament. I don't care whether the scientists are Christian or not. They are still trying to access the things of God through their intellect and reason, and all they will achieve is pointless debate and frustration and false conclusions.

 

[Ken Behrens]

This type of analysis can't prove anything because it remains in the soulish intellect, while any gift of the Spirit is in the spirit which is accessed by faith and not by reason of any kind. Any scientific analysis would be just pure nonsense.

So you would tell Christian musicians not to do technical exercises, since it might interfere with them playing in the spirit? Or you would tell the sound technicians not to study the room acoustics? Intellect must work in the service of the spirit.

 

[diane.]

Someone speaking in tongues over secular radio is speaking nonsense and has no significance to God or anyone else. 1 Corinthians 14 proves that.

Greetings, Oscarr.
I am wondering if you were to actually view the video from start to finish (25 min.) and then read the testimony, which gives context to the video (post #20 above), I feel perhaps you may have a slightly different view, particularly because you say in your post to me that, "...is speaking nonsense and has no significance to God or anyone else". This statement is absolutely incorrect. Just for your information, I did by no means pray in the spirit on secular radio. What you hear on secular radio is an audio tape recording. Again, I refer you to the video itself and the subsequent testimony.

You refer to 1 Cor 14. Chapter 14 is an orderly account of how the gift of prophecy and tongues are to be used - as God is a God of order and not a God of disorder. If you read the chapter in its entirety, we see that most of the instruction surrounding speaking in tongues is instruction for a group (church) setting. Of course, we use our prayer language when in personal, private devotion i.e. in our prayer closets. But it is most definitely used in the church environment, as long as there is an interpretation given.

Please take note of 1 Cor 14:22 (NIV), which reads: "Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers."

I hope you do consider viewing the video. I think it may be worth your while. To view the video 'Speaking in Tongues', click here.
I'm assuming when you identify yourself as a senior veteran, you do mean from the military... if so, Thank you.
Grace and peace.
diane.

 

[DJItalianspur]

Interesting that historically some of the most Godly, influential people never spoke in tongues. Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, Spurgeon, Wesley, Whitfield, Edwards, Lloyd Jones ....... if you look at some of the most famous leaders of the mega churches where they claim to speak in tongues, their messages and lives are not in line with the word of God, many have made allot of money doing so and still do!. I would be interested to see historically if anyone can source any Godly men who have spoken in tougues before 1900 and if the message was of God?

 

[Ken Behrens]

Interesting that historically some of the most Godly, influential people never spoke in tongues. Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, Spurgeon, Wesley, Whitfield, Edwards, Lloyd Jones ....... if you look at some of the most famous leaders of the mega churches where they claim to speak in tongues, their messages and lives are not in line with the word of God, many have made allot of money doing so and still do!. I would be interested to see historically if anyone can source any Godly men who have spoken in tougues before 1900 and if the message was of God?

Among those who have studied the matter, there are two opinions. The first is that tongues were only for the early church, and that no one since about 300AD has spoken in tongues. I won't go into details here, but this position is based on incorrect historical procedure, and bad logic. This incorrect position is called cessation-ism, and there are threads about it here, and at every other Christian discussion site. (In fact I'm sure there will be an argument beginning here, since I have posted this.)

The second position is that tongues were suppressed by the church in about 300AD, and were not seen in the world in any notable measure until about 1907 AD at Azusa Street. There are some debatable stories that the source of these tongues is restoration of the gift at precisely 11:55PM Dec. 31, 1900 (the last five minutes of the nineteenth century), at Bethel Bible College. While I doubt the exact moment, the story is likely more or less true, and traces the development of the gift of tongues to the work of most of the men you mention.

The simple reason no one is said to have spoken in tongues before this time, is that the cultural climate of the church was such that anyone who did, would be afraid to admit it.

In historical context, tongues are simply one phase in what has now been a 500 year project God is doing to achieve the restoration of the priesthood of the individual believer to the church, with each phase building on the last. The phases are roughly Luther's realization that you do not have to be Catholic to get to heaven, the beginnings of varied Christian experience in protestantism, the founding of America as a place of experimentation, the realization of Charles Finney that it is important to have a personal relationship with God. The study of Bethel Bible college, with the restoration of the gifts, the Catholic Charismatic renewal and its de facto expulsion from the western Catholic church, the institution of non-programmed informal worship and non-denominational churches, the home church, and the recognition of the five-fold ministries. This last part is of course opinion, but I think discussion sites such as this one, within a few years (to some extent it is happening now), will serve to launch a new era when all Christians enter a ministry of God's choosing, and respect each other, although they differ in experience and work in the Kingdom.

And in fairness to the many obvious pastors whose lives are not in line with the Word of God, we can look at any time in history, and find even Popes who had public sins, pastors who abused their positions, and false teachings of all types. The particular people you selected, are the cream of the crop each for their era.

 

[DJItalianspur]

Not sure why you could call cessationism an incorrrect position, some of the great men (maybe the best bible teachers) that I have mentioned strongly held this position, but we maybe opening up another debate here that maybe best in another forum.

Why do you think tougues were suppressed?
Looking at the sufferings of Christians throughout history do you think men like Whitfield and Wesley were afraid to admit it? These men had little fear of what others thought I doubt they were afraid. Look at the great lengths they went to live more holy. I think if they could speak in tougues they would have.

This 500 year project, can you prove this? I assume you have not scripture for this? Again this maybe opening another debate best left for another forum.

I guess my question is what benefit does one have speaking in tougues today? How does this compare to prayer, bible reading and preaching, fellowship, worship, witness?

Would it not be better to seek the above which we know produces fruit?

Where is the fruit today from speaking in tougues, I would be interested to hear views?

I note many people can have emotional experiences when speaking in tougues, but I would like to see how speaking in tougues makes one more Christ like?

Apologies if it comes across a little negative but I know many people who claim to speak in tougues and what worries me is very few of them have a testimony!

 

[Ken Behrens]

1. Not sure why you could call cessationism an incorrrect position.

2. Why do you think tougues were suppressed?
Looking at the sufferings of Christians throughout history do you think men like Whitfield and Wesley were afraid to admit it? These men had little fear of what others thought I doubt they were afraid. Look at the great lengths they went to live more holy. I think if they could speak in tougues they would have.

3. This 500 year project, can you prove this? I assume you have not scripture for this? Again this maybe opening another debate best left for another forum.

4. I guess my question is what benefit does one have speaking in tougues today? How does this compare to prayer, bible reading and preaching, fellowship, worship, witness?

5. Would it not be better to seek the above which we know produces fruit?

Where is the fruit today from speaking in tougues, I would be interested to hear views?

I note many people can have emotional experiences when speaking in tougues, but I would like to see how speaking in tougues makes one more Christ like?

Apologies if it comes across a little negative but I know many people who claim to speak in tougues and what worries me is very few of them have a testimony!

1. I'll be brief. The argument is that tongues ceased about 300 AD (true). The conclusion is that God wanted them to stop. (questionable, they could have been suppressed, for example). The application is that since God did want them then, He does not want them now. (Even assuming He did not want them then, the application does not follow. Recall that for many hundreds of years, it was taught that lay people have no right to read the Bible in their own language. Clearly God has restored that right today.) Next, it is asserted that since God does not want them today, tongues do not exist unless they are some kind of counterfeit. You can see that there is no historical research as to why tongues stopped, and illogical reasoning.

2. Tongues equip a believer to become part of Christ's ongoing mission to finish making us better. He who prays in tongues frequently begins prophesying, healing, exercising administrative gifts, etc. All of these get in the way of a church that is trying to become one with the government (fourth-fifth century Rome is what I mean), and needs control of the masses to do so. All the gifts in I Cor. 12 were suppressed simultaneously, for this reason.

3. It is a historical theory. That God wants each of us to exercise some ministry within the Body of Christ and/or to the world, seems to me to be so obvious in Scripture as to not require proof. It is historically trivial to show that Protestantism has multiplied the percent of Christians in active ministry, and the number of pastors, evangelists, etc. Like any historical theory, it is theory. You may decide for yourself if you agree that this is what God is trying to do.

4. The benefit of tongues is that it opens the believer to working in other gifts. When tongues was restored, various people began to walk in visible ministries of healing, for example. It was the children of this generation that trusted God for the research that produced antibiotics, cures for polio, cancer, etc. It is an interesting observation that since there have been Christian nations, no serious social or technological progress has begun anywhere but from a Christian nation. It is also an interesting observation that tongues and the gifts were restored as part of the movement that finally abolished slavery, and for the first time in the history of mankind, gave us the technology to live differently than people lived from ancient Egypt until 1900AD (which is all but identical). In my own life, when I was a child, neither anointed music nor "praise and worship" existed. It looks to me as though tongues is what opened people to seeing these new things God wanted to give us. I am not saying tongues caused these things. I am saying the God's grace finally reached us to accept these things, and that tongues was part of the process of that acceptance developing on a world-wide basis, as people realized that each was special to God.

5. I would like to seek everything God has for me, above, below, or in-between. We are not told that "Some good gifts come from God", but that "EVERY good gift comes from God", and then it is added that "every perfect gift also comes from God" implying that God has gifts for us which are not perfect, as those things which are above are perfect. (James 1:17 is the verse, which also argues against God ever stopping the gifts as cessationists claim)

 

[DJItalianspur]

Let me pick two points from your reply:

Point 2 how does speaking in tougues make us better Christians. Have you experienced this? How does this compare with reading the bible and prayer? Do you know anyone who has spoken in tougues that has benifited from this?

Point 5 James 1:17 does not mention tougues. The chapter or book does not contain any reference to tougues. Interesting in Chapter 5 the instructions for those who are sick. The book of James and the instructions of prayer (no mention of miracles) could be a strong argument for the gifts coming to an end and the word being complete many years ago.

Back to point 2 what evidence is there that people who speak in toungues today produce any fruit?

Would we not be better encouraging those who think they speak in toungues, not to unless they can prove it is of benefit? Instead encouraging them to read the bible, pray, serve in their local church and witness?

I would like to challenge anyone who speaks in tongues to weigh up the benifts of this over listening to a good sermon or intelligent prayer. Your thoughts....?