Can ChatGPT interpret speaking in tongues?

[Guojing]

Ah, OK. Forgive me for being over-sensitive.

Covid-19 did more, than any other churches, in teaching people that Psalms 91 is not meant to be applied to the Body of Christ today.

 

[The Liturgist]

Covid-19 did more, than any other churches, in teaching people that Psalms 91 is not meant to be applied to the Body of Christ today.

Not true.

In Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches no one was infected with Covid as a result of partaking of the Eucharist despite the use of a shared spoon in the Eastern and Coptic rite liturgies.

 

[Guojing]

Not true.

In Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches no one was infected with Covid as a result of partaking of the Eucharist despite the use of a shared spoon in the Eastern and Coptic rite liturgies.

and you are sure about this "lack of causality" because of?

 

[johansen]

What you see as an endorsement I see the exact opposite.

What does "edify themselves" mean to you in the context of personal prayer in an unknown tongue?

 

[Rose_bud]

On the contrary, the Nigerian song you are singing basically echoes an extremely large number of ancient Christian hymns which in turn are echoing several of the Psalms and other Canticles, for example, the Magnificat. My main complaint about the hymn you are quoting is that it is rather repetitive and also it doesn’t sound like it contains much doctrine beyond the principle of divine inscrutability.

Additionally, some Charismatic and Pentecostal worship actually does closely resemble liturgical worship, for example, that of Roman Catholics who are invested in the Charismatic movement (there was also an attempt to introduce Charismatic practices into the Orthodox church but we rejected it).

On that point, how much liturgical worship have you actually experienced, and where? Because in my experience many people who make sweeping generalizations about liturgical worship have only limited experience with it, which often is limited to the semi-liturgical worship of some of the mainline churches (for example, the United Methodist Book of Worship), or is else limited to an experience of Roman Catholic worship since the 1969 change to the liturgy; most former Catholics I know left the Roman church after 1969 and their dim view of the Roman mass is of the post-1969 Roman mass, for they never had an opportunity to experience the old Tridentine Mass in all of its splendor (indeed, by 1968 the Tridentine mass had been highly compromised; there was a revision to the missal in 1965 which actually implemented the changes desired by Vatican II, but this did not stop Annibale Bugnini from carrying out his revision to the Roman mass, which made the Roman liturgy very close to Protestant liturgies; indeed, it would become closer since after 1969, the mainline Protestant churches adopted the Common Lectionary, a three year lectionary based on the 1969 Roman lectionary, and later the Revised Common Lectionary which remains in use today, and this is where the practice of having Year A focused on the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Year B focused on the Gospel According to St. Mark and Year C focused on the Gospel According to St. Luke originated from. Before this lectionary, all Christian churches that used lectionaries (which was nearly all of them aside from some Baptist, Reformed and Radical Reformed churches) all used one year lectionaries, which remain the norm in the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian churches as well as in certain liturgically traditional Anglican, Catholic, Lutheran and other Western curches.

These new three year lectionaries are highly defective; they were instituted ostensibly to increase the amount of scripture heard in church on a Sunday, but have the effect of omitting some of the most popular and moving pericopes from the Gospels and the Epistles, for example, the pericope from the Gospel According to John “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” is missing, as is 1 Corinthians 11:27-34, which warns of the consequences of partaking of the Eucharist unworthily, not discerning the body and blood of Christ our True God, which was historically read along with the institution narrative from that same chapter on Maundy Thursday in Holy Week (both by churches which believe in the real presence such as Lutherans and Roman Catholics, and by churches which officially do not require such a belief and at one time opposed it, for example, the Anglicans)*.

* There was always at least a minority of Anglicans who did believe in the Real Presence, despite attempts to discourage them such as the infamous Black Rubric in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which remains the official version still in use in the Church of England; the reason it remains the official reason is because, while in the 1920s a majority of Anglicans desired a reform of the Book of Common Prayer according to high churchmanship - High Church Anglicans tend to believe either in a physical or spiritual presence of Christ in the Eucharist, among other differences, which would have removed the Black Rubric, the minority of Low Church members conspired with non-Anglican Protestants in the House of Commons to veto the adoption of the 1928 BCP, which at the time Parliament was able to do - the Church of England did not gain legal autonomy over its liturgical affairs until the 1950s or 60s. In the US, an unrelated Book of Common Prayer was adopted in 1928 by the Protestant Episcopal Church, now known as the Episcopal Church USA, which is much loved, and the ill-advised replacement of this book in 1979 along with other liberal reforms caused a schism, with the Continuing Anglicans consisting of those Anglicans opposed chiefly to the liberal theological direction but also opposed in many cases to the adoption of the 1979 BCP; since that time the Episcopal Church has permitted the continued use of the 1928 book, and has thus avoided further schisms along those lines, but their decision to perform gay marriages caused a massive set of schisms in 2003 resulting in the formation of the Anglican Church in North America and the departure from the Episcopal Church of several dioceses. The Episcopal Church naturally tried to claim their real estate; the DIocese of the San Joaquins in California did not even try to contest it, but in Texas, the Diocese of Fort Worth, and also the Diocese of South Carolina, both have fought it, and in Fort Worth they won control of their property following a supreme court ruling; I don‘t know what the current status is on the case in South Carolina, but if I recall there were some additional complexities there not present in Fort Worth.

The frustrating thing for many conservative Christians, myself included, is that we were, for a time, left with a choice of either attending conservative churches which worshipped in a Charismatic manner or using Christian rock music, which became the norm at the United Methodist parish where I was baptized, or attending other parishes which still used the traditional hymns and the traditional liturgy, such as it was (a service that was by no means ornate, lacking most of the features of the ancient liturgical forms used by the Orthodox), but which were under the control of the liberal clergy. Thus Traditional Liturgical Churches can be seen as an attempt by conservatives to reclaim the liturgical worship we grew up with, and to preserve the oldest and most historically important forms of worship documented in the Christian church.

Thus where as it is an open question whether or not the tongues as reported by Pentecostals and Charismatics correspond precisely to what happened in Acts following the descent of the Holy Spirit and as discussed by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians, we do know with certainty the antiquity and the provenance of the worship used in the Orthodox and Assyrian Divine Liturgies such as those of St. James, St. Basil, St. Mark/St. Cyril, St. John Chrysostom and Saints Addai and Mari (which are, respectively, the ancient liturgies of Jerusalem, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and the Eastern churches founded by St. Thomas in East Syria, Mesopotamia, and India), and in the ancient Roman liturgy (substantial traces of which remain in the Mass as used by the Roman Catholics, some Anglicans, the Western Rite Orthodox and the Lutherans, for example the standard set of hymns beginning with Kyrie Eleison, continuing with Gloria in Excelsis Deo, the Nicene Creed, the Sanctus (which is also shared with all other ancient liturgies) and concluding with the Agnus Dei. There are several other historical liturgies which I did not enumerate which are also still in use, reflecting the ancient worship of Armenia, Ethiopia and Eritrea, Milan, and Toledo, among others.

Thank you for your lengthy post, but don't be offended if I respond only to the aspects that catch my attention. You can let me know if I've missed anything crucial.

I'm not disputing that God communicates through language we can understand. However, I believe He also provides a way for us to connect with Him on a deeper, transcendent level. The lyrics I mentioned touch on the principle of divine inscrutability (as you stated) the idea that God is beyond human comprehension and can only be discerned spiritually. As I understand it, speaking in tongues is a way to experience and express this mysterious aspect of God's nature.

I was not making a sweeping generalisation, I was assuming that you may not be accustomed to the below as a form of worship toward God?

If you are, I stand corrected.

Again, this may be an unfounded claim, as it is my perception, but your posts both here and in other threads seem to imply that Pentecostal and Charismatic movements are not "valid" forms of worship. While this may not be your intention, the tone comes across as condescending, suggesting that traditional expressions of faith are the primary or only authentic way to connect with God. I value and appreciate the importance of historical aspects and core principles of the faith, but my critique is that this approach can make worship seem as if it has been buried in a time-capsule, frozen in the days of the apostles and early centuries, and worship as expressed through music style has been relegated to this area and cultural expression, anything beyond this is heresy. I think it's essential to acknowledge the diversity of worship styles and expressions. The Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, for instance, bring unique perspectives and experiences to worship that can be very enriching for God's people. Just like the older traditional form of worship does as well.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Of course it has always been a topic that concerns many. While some charismatics might seem errant, their fruits (both Catholic and Protestants) are hard to ignore. Most show growth rates, not declines and they are very active and have tremendous growth in missions.

Growth rates prove veracity? Islam seems to be growing faster than Christians in Ontario; following your logic, Islam is right. Church growth and right doctrine are often unrelated, however itchy ears hearing what they want to hear often results in growth above Churches that tell you what you need to hear.

 

[Richard T]

Growth rates prove veracity? Islam seems to be growing faster than Christians in Ontario; following your logic, Islam is right. Church growth and right doctrine are often unrelated, however itchy ears hearing what they want to hear often results in growth above Churches that tell you what you need to hear.

Yes, that is one possible thesis. I think it too is partially correct. However, most Pentecostal/Charismatic churches do preach holiness. They are certainly not progressive though some may err in over emphasizing material things. On the positive side though churches that demonstrate in power various gifts of the Spirit are likely to have more success. I base this off of Paul. Even tongues can be a sign for unbelievers. I Cor 14:22
1 Corinthians 2:4 (KJV)
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:"

Acts 1:8 (KJV)
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Acts 2:16-17 (KJV)
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

What is interesting is that this power is not concentrating into one denomination, but rather God is using different denominations to create a Charismatic movement. This is especially true if you go outside the USA.

Brazil - About half the Catholics in Brazil are now charismatic (33 million). "While the Catholic Charismatic Renewal (CCR) is experiencing growth in Brazil, it is Pentecostalism that is generally considered the fastest-growing Christian sect there. The CCR, while significant and attracting many Catholics, is part of a larger trend of charismatic Christianity that includes both Catholic and Protestant groups. Pentecostalism, with its emphasis on the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts, has seen a particularly strong surge in Brazil, especially since the 1990s"

Indonesia -"The Bethel Church of Indonesia, known in Indonesian as Gereja Bethel Indonesia (GBI), is a large Pentecostal Christian denomination in Indonesia. It's the largest Protestant and Pentecostal denomination in the country, with over 7,000 local churches and nearly three million members. GBI is affiliated with the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee). Pentecostal ecclesiology in the new adaptation era: The case of the Bethel Church of Indonesia

Global South - "Pentecostalism is the fastest-growing religious movement in the world;[14][15][16][17][18] this growth is primarily due to religious conversion to Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity.[19][20] ...Christianity earns about 65.1 million people due to factors such as birth rate and religious conversion while losing 27.4 million people due to factors such as death rate and religious apostasy. Most of the net growth in the numbers of Christians are in Africa, Latin America and Asia.[22]" Christian population growth - Wikipedia

I am sure that I could sample many other nations and come up with similar conclusions.

As to other religions that are patently false, some nations are experiencing high growth, though usually at a low base. Correlating with growth should be compared with known true Christianity. I don't believe that Pentecostals/Charismatics are typicaly a false movement, though I think a few people suggest this. Most however, do preach basic salvation and make converts.

So while growth alone does not explain veracity, growth certainly can show that God is involved in something when Jesus is preached. I would thus argue that the charismatic renewal is positive for the worldwide church. That while some pockets of out of balance teaching may exist, God is still moving with the group as a whole. If this thesis is false based on poor doctrine, what is it that makes it so false that these people are not saved?

II Timothy 4:3 addresses ear tickling. One might conclude that charismatics are such churches but I think the evidence is not there for most. Why? Ear ticklers to me would not want to spend so much time in church. Though Eastern Orthodox and Catholics have some services that can last for hours, many Pentecostal services too last quite some time especially in the global South. Additionally, I doubt ear ticklers want to go to the altar for various ministry and have leaders lay hands on them for the need that is preached that day. Though this is not universal in all Pentecostal and Charismatic churches, I would say it is common especially in the global South.

Here is an interesting take on ear tickling that I would have never thought of. Preaching that Tickles the Ear

If we add this type of thinking the ministers that get their messages from the Holy Spirit would seem to be the least ear tickling. Those that worry about what the people think, consider their own flesh or who are incapable of hearing from God for a message on their own are the most at risk for ear tickling. I'm open to hear more about how this would play out in comparing denominations against each other.

So while no hypothesis dealing with people can be "proven" I do think that there are some tendencies that suggest God is behind the charismatic renewal. If so, will the next move will expand it even more? I would say yes, at least for the world a whole. I suppose it does not matter though the method of renewal and revival. But I think it does rest on the power of God and the prayers of those who are committed with God to the ministry of reconcilation, the fervor for the mission field and knowledge of the word. I pray that is all Christian churches.

 

[JulieB67]

What does "edify themselves" mean to you in the context of personal prayer in an unknown tongue?

Paul's main intent in this chapter is about edifying the church and which is the better gift to do so.

For example if someone walked into church and spoke in an unknown language to the rest the only thing he could do is edify himself. Edify means to build up and we are talking about things that would rather build up the church.

This verse

I Corinthians 14:14 "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."

If you pray in an unknown tongue that you yourself don't understand - it would be unfruitful -barren. So there would be no "edifying/building of yourself.

I Corinthians 14:15 "What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."

When we pray in the spirit we also pray with understanding.

In the Greek edify-

building, edification
Feminine (abstract) of a compound of oikos and the base of doma; architecture, i.e. (concretely) a structure; figuratively, confirmation -- building, edify(-ication, -ing).

If one's understanding is empty/barren there would be no building or structure given. So when we pray in the spirit we should pray in with understanding as well. I believe that's Paul's point, Yes, God would understand but we need the edification, the building, the structure. Which is what Paul is talking about within the church. He's just making a point in some of these verses about what's more important, etc.

I know other's believe and see it differently but that's how I see Paul's teaching in this chapter.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

It kinda' reminds me of a lyric from a charismatic singer/entertainer who once called it, "untie my bowtie, who stole my honda stuff"

In Perth the saying is "Ishouldaboughtahondabutiboughtakia"

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Yes, that is one possible thesis. I think it too is partially correct. However, most Pentecostal/Charismatic churches do preach holiness. They are certainly not progressive though some may err in over emphasizing material things. On the positive side though churches that demonstrate in power various gifts of the Spirit are likely to have more success. I base this off of Paul. Even tongues can be a sign for unbelievers. I Cor 14:22
1 Corinthians 2:4 (KJV)
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:"

Acts 1:8 (KJV)
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Acts 2:16-17 (KJV)
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

What is interesting is that this power is not concentrating into one denomination, but rather God is using different denominations to create a Charismatic movement. This is especially true if you go outside the USA.

Brazil - About half the Catholics in Brazil are now charismatic (33 million). "While the Catholic Charismatic Renewal (CCR) is experiencing growth in Brazil, it is Pentecostalism that is generally considered the fastest-growing Christian sect there. The CCR, while significant and attracting many Catholics, is part of a larger trend of charismatic Christianity that includes both Catholic and Protestant groups. Pentecostalism, with its emphasis on the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts, has seen a particularly strong surge in Brazil, especially since the 1990s"

Indonesia -"The Bethel Church of Indonesia, known in Indonesian as Gereja Bethel Indonesia (GBI), is a large Pentecostal Christian denomination in Indonesia. It's the largest Protestant and Pentecostal denomination in the country, with over 7,000 local churches and nearly three million members. GBI is affiliated with the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee). Pentecostal ecclesiology in the new adaptation era: The case of the Bethel Church of Indonesia

Global South - "Pentecostalism is the fastest-growing religious movement in the world;[14][15][16][17][18] this growth is primarily due to religious conversion to Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity.[19][20] ...Christianity earns about 65.1 million people due to factors such as birth rate and religious conversion while losing 27.4 million people due to factors such as death rate and religious apostasy. Most of the net growth in the numbers of Christians are in Africa, Latin America and Asia.[22]" Christian population growth - Wikipedia

I am sure that I could sample many other nations and come up with similar conclusions.

As to other religions that are patently false, some nations are experiencing high growth, though usually at a low base. Correlating with growth should be compared with known true Christianity. I don't believe that Pentecostals/Charismatics are typicaly a false movement, though I think a few people suggest this. Most however, do preach basic salvation and make converts.

So while growth alone does not explain veracity, growth certainly can show that God is involved in something when Jesus is preached. I would thus argue that the charismatic renewal is positive for the worldwide church. That while some pockets of out of balance teaching may exist, God is still moving with the group as a whole. If this thesis is false based on poor doctrine, what is it that makes it so false that these people are not saved?

II Timothy 4:3 addresses ear tickling. One might conclude that charismatics are such churches but I think the evidence is not there for most. Why? Ear ticklers to me would not want to spend so much time in church. Though Eastern Orthodox and Catholics have some services that can last for hours, many Pentecostal services too last quite some time especially in the global South. Additionally, I doubt ear ticklers want to go to the altar for various ministry and have leaders lay hands on them for the need that is preached that day. Though this is not universal in all Pentecostal and Charismatic churches, I would say it is common especially in the global South.

Here is an interesting take on ear tickling that I would have never thought of. Preaching that Tickles the Ear

If we add this type of thinking the ministers that get their messages from the Holy Spirit would seem to be the least ear tickling. Those that worry about what the people think, consider their own flesh or who are incapable of hearing from God for a message on their own are the most at risk for ear tickling. I'm open to hear more about how this would play out in comparing denominations against each other.

So while no hypothesis dealing with people can be "proven" I do think that there are some tendencies that suggest God is behind the charismatic renewal. If so, will the next move will expand it even more? I would say yes, at least for the world a whole. I suppose it does not matter though the method of renewal and revival. But I think it does rest on the power of God and the prayers of those who are committed with God to the ministry of reconcilation, the fervor for the mission field and knowledge of the word. I pray that is all Christian churches.

Also decision theology, OSAS, legalism, works righteousness, Some, most or all seem to be part of assemblies that hold to "speaking in tongues" as we are discussing here. Few if any of these (in my opinion) heterodox practices are found in assemblies which reject what we see as non Biblical gibberish.

 

[johansen]

If one's understanding is empty/barren there would be no building or structure given.

the people i know who pray in tongues.. know what they are saying, or like my experience, they know that what was spoken did edify their spirit, even if intellectually they didn't know what they were saying.

 

[The Liturgist]

and you are sure about this "lack of causality" because of?

Yes.

 

[ARBITER01]

Paul's main intent in this chapter is about edifying the church and which is the better gift to do so.

All of the gifts are for edifying the body of Christ.

For example if someone walked into church and spoke in an unknown language to the rest the only thing he could do is edify himself.

You're correct here, but for the wrong reason.

My ability to "pray" in tongues is not a ministry to "speak" in tongues. In other words, GOD doesn't use my gift as a ministry to our local body, He utilizes others. My gift only operates on a personal level for prayer.

If you pray in an unknown tongue that you yourself don't understand - it would be unfruitful -barren. So there would be no "edifying/building of yourself.

You don't understand what edification is.

Christianity is a spiritual walk, not a material one. We have edification of our human spirit, not edification of our mind.

When we pray in the spirit we also pray with understanding.

If one's understanding is empty/barren there would be no building or structure given. So when we pray in the spirit we should pray in with understanding as well. I believe that's Paul's point, Yes, God would understand but we need the edification, the building, the structure. Which is what Paul is talking about within the church. He's just making a point in some of these verses about what's more important, etc.

I know other's believe and see it differently but that's how I see Paul's teaching in this chapter.

Trying to explain the gifts of The Spirit without operating in them is like reading a book on rocket science and then thinking you are a professor of it.

Praying by the spirit and praying with understanding are two entirely different things in scripture. The only way that I can have any understanding of what I'm praying for by the spirit is if my gift of the interpretation of tongues is operated also.

The gift of tongues is only understood in human languages by the gift of interpretation. This is what you fail to understand.

 

[mourningdove~]

I know that reference.

I have a healing miracle testimony connected to that guy.

I know that reference, and I know 'that guy', too.
I love that brother, and miss his presence here on earth. What a committed servant of the Lord he was!

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I know that reference, and I know 'that guy', too.
I love that brother, and miss his presence here on earth. What a committed servant of the Lord he was!

Is his identity a secret?

 

[mourningdove~]

As a matter of interest ChatGTP can write in Pentecostal style tongues. I asked Copilot to provide a paragraph in such tonhues, this is what it gave:
I asked "type a paragraph in simulated Pentecostal tongues, please" and Copilot gave:

Certainly. Here is a paragraph that simulates glossolalia in the style often associated with Pentecostal worship—crafted to evoke the rhythm, phonetic texture, and spiritual fervour of such utterances, while remaining respectful and imaginative:​

Shandala makoré vashanta ralamandé! Ikaraba sotoriam, elandriya vashekoto! Halama shundaraya, tikoré balandé, hoshania! Rikaraba sundalé, emandriya toshakaya, halelé! Vashundra kalamandé, shakaraya! Hoshania, hoshania, tikoré balandé!​

​

This is not a translation of any known language, nor does it carry semantic meaning in the conventional sense. Rather, it mimics the cadence and emotive flow of glossolalia—often experienced as a spontaneous, Spirit-led expression beyond linguistic structure. If you wish, I can also explore theological interpretations of glossolalia across traditions, or generate a fictional liturgical context in which such utterances might appear.​

​

It is interesting, I hope it doesn't offend anybody. It is just what Copilot gave in response to my request.

That is interesting ... and I don't personally take offense at your inquiry ... I don't believe you meant to be offensive ... but I do think that some of the discussion in this thread seems abit disrespectful of the Holy Spirit.

You see, for those of us who believe, the gift of tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit.
And He is Holy.


Not sure how this topic got selected for the GT forum, but seems to me it would have been better placed in the Pentecostal or SF/Charismatic forums, where persons there actually believe in the gift of tongues. Belief in the gift, would seem the place for this discussion to sensibly begin.

... just sayin'

 

[RDKirk]

Is his identity a secret?

The late pastor and contemporary gospel artist Carman Licciardello, known professionally as simply Carman.

He joked that whenever he said his full name in church, someone interpreted. Which is appropriate for this thread.

I had a chance to join the crew to do a concert set-up and break-down for him when he played in DC in the 80s.

 

[mourningdove~]

I can talk in my mind to Jesus while I also pray by my spirit out loud. It's quite easy.

Yes, because we are tri-part beings ... spirit, soul, and body.

Tongues come through our born again spirit, and not from our natural mind, which is a part of our soul.

 

[mourningdove~]

Faith is still a factor when operating in the gifts.

And where there is not faith, there will not be understanding.

But I appreciate your contributions to this thread. You are particularly good at explaining things in an educational sort of way!

 

[mourningdove~]

The late pastor and contemporary gospel artist Carman Licciardello, known professionally as simply Carman.

He joked that whenever he said his full name in church, someone interpreted. Which is appropriate for this thread.

I had a chance to join the crew to do a concert set-up and break-down for him when he played in DC in the 80s.

The first time I spoke in tongues, I was worshipping while listening to Carman music.

... just loved that guy, for all he did for the Body of Christ.

Tongues is a supernatural gift. I can't imagine someone taking the time to write out his 'tongues' and ask Chat GPT for an interpretation, nor do I see that as a wise usage of the gift ... if there actually is a true gift there.