I have two questions regarding tongues ?

[Gregory Thompson]

Something to consider: I grew up in the Pittsburgh area which has a very definite dialect of English. When I responded to God's call to go into the military I learned pretty quickly that people not from Pittsburgh couldn't understand me, (and my dialect wasn't as strong as some people I knew), and I had to learn to speak differently. Now I live a bit further north than where I grew up and very close to an area where three very distinct dialects are common. I can think of a few convenience stores where you could easily find an Amish, a Yinzer, and a Midwestern-speaking local in the evening of the first Monday of December. So, I picture the three of them reading the same paragraph out loud at the same time and try to imagine me understanding what they are saying well enough to repeat any of it back, and I hear in two of those dialects fluently. Now add in a Bronx New Yorker and a Bostonian. We still haven't gotten southwest of the Allegheny Mountains, and I probably wouldn't be able to repeat any of it back in their words. Now let's grab a native Virginian and an Alabaman. Let's go back to NY and add in someone from Harlem. Now I'm barely picking out single words and we haven't left the Eastern time zone. Now let's get closer to at least crossing the Mississippi, but I won't be fair about this, a Cajun, and three people from different parts of Tennessee. These people all technically speak different dialects of the same language, but if you had them all all on a stage reading the same passage of literature at the same time and at the same pace and volume into microphones, it would be an indiscernible cacophony even if you spoke one of their dialects.

The Bible says in Acts 2 that every nation under the sun was represented there. How many complete languages would that have been? Yet, each person heard in his own dialect. Are we really sure that human languages were spoken in Acts 2?

In Acts 2, the people speaking spoke in their own language . the holy spirit acted as a filter that caused each person to hear what was said in their own language . it's slightly different than the gift of tongues and it's psychological counterpart/mimick baby talk . it is different because what happened was different . this is more of a "wonder" that involved translation and in a way symbolically signalled that the curse of babel has been reversed .

 

[Biblicist]

Something to consider: I grew up in the Pittsburgh area which has a very definite dialect of English. When I responded to God's call to go into the military I learned pretty quickly that people not from Pittsburgh couldn't understand me, (and my dialect wasn't as strong as some people I knew), and I had to learn to speak differently. Now I live a bit further north than where I grew up and very close to an area where three very distinct dialects are common. I can think of a few convenience stores where you could easily find an Amish, a Yinzer, and a Midwestern-speaking local in the evening of the first Monday of December. So, I picture the three of them reading the same paragraph out loud at the same time and try to imagine me understanding what they are saying well enough to repeat any of it back, and I hear in two of those dialects fluently. Now add in a Bronx New Yorker and a Bostonian. We still haven't gotten southwest of the Allegheny Mountains, and I probably wouldn't be able to repeat any of it back in their words. Now let's grab a native Virginian and an Alabaman. Let's go back to NY and add in someone from Harlem. Now I'm barely picking out single words and we haven't left the Eastern time zone. Now let's get closer to at least crossing the Mississippi, but I won't be fair about this, a Cajun, and three people from different parts of Tennessee. These people all technically speak different dialects of the same language, but if you had them all all on a stage reading the same passage of literature at the same time and at the same pace and volume into microphones, it would be an indiscernible cacophony even if you spoke one of their dialects.

The Bible says in Acts 2 that every nation under the sun was represented there. How many complete languages would that have been? Yet, each person heard in his own dialect. Are we really sure that human languages were spoken in Acts 2?

As the saying "every nation under heaven" would have undoubtedly been a collequialism for those nations that were known to Israel then this would reduce the number of the languages that the 120 would have spoken. Then we have the fact that most if not the vast majority would have also known or been conversant with Greek or Latin as they were the two major languages of the Empire.

The idea that the Holy Spirit fell upon the unregenerate where he enabled them to understand goes against the purpose of the Day of Pentecost where the Holy Spirit was first given to the Church. Peter says in his reply to the Jews in Acts 2:17,18

'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says, 'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND; AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY, AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS, AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT And they shall prophesy.
​

and

Acts 2:38,39 Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
"For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."
​

Within Pentecostal thought we can still come across the view that the tongues spoken by the 120 were different to the normal everyday use of tongues in prayer or even with the tongues spoken in church but this is a misunderstanding. When the 120 were praising God in tongues (not that they were speaking to the crowd), they would have only realised that they (or some) were doing this after the crowd approached the Apostles as to how this was happening.

So when we pray in tongues during times of personal prayer and praise, when we pray in tongues during church or on the Day of Pentecost, they were all the same tongues but with the Day of Pentecost the Spirit chose to speak through the 120 (or most of them) in known human languages which in the Scriptures only occurred this way on that day.

 

[jiminpa]

As the saying "every nation under heaven" would have undoubtedly been a collequialism for those nations that were known to Israel then this would reduce the number of the languages that the 120 would have spoken. Then we have the fact that most if not the vast majority would have also known or been conversant with Greek or Latin as they were the two major languages of the Empire.

The idea that the Holy Spirit fell upon the unregenerate where he enabled them to understand goes against the purpose of the Day of Pentecost where the Holy Spirit was first given to the Church. Peter says in his reply to the Jews in Acts 2:17,18

'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says, 'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND; AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY, AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS, AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT And they shall prophesy.
​

and

Acts 2:38,39 Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
"For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."
​

Within Pentecostal thought we can still come across the view that the tongues spoken by the 120 were different to the normal everyday use of tongues in prayer or even with the tongues spoken in church but this is a misunderstanding. When the 120 were praising God in tongues (not that they were speaking to the crowd), they would have only realised that they (or some) were doing this after the crowd approached the Apostles as to how this was happening.

So when we pray in tongues during times of personal prayer and praise, when we pray in tongues during church or on the Day of Pentecost, they were all the same tongues but with the Day of Pentecost the Spirit chose to speak through the 120 (or most of them) in known human languages which in the Scriptures only occurred this way on that day.

I'm not so sure I see it your way, but then I'm not fully convinced that they were spiritual languages either. Too many things in the verses that could well be colloquialisms.

 

[Receiver]

First the bible says if there is no interpreter there speaker should be quite, but how do you know if there is someone in the congregation with the gift of interpretation, because you speak ?

The same way you know if theer is a preacher, teacher or other officer "in the house". Join a church where these people are.

Second, if a tongue is given in a heavenly language, how do you know the the interpretation is correct ? If you have no way to verify it - like you are able to in the event of a human language being supernaturally spoken ?

In the church I'm in, we politely limit the operation of gifts to regular members, people that know what it means to "walk in the truth of the Holy Spirit". This isn't 100% foolproof, yopu still have to be discerning:

"Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge." (1 Cor.14:29)

On a very few occasions the pastor / leader has interrupted someone speaking from their own mind to say that someone else should speak.
999 times out of 1000 it will not be known what is said in tongues, the other 1 time a visitor will recognise the language and confirm it was as if God was speaking to them.

 

[Biblicist]

I'm not so sure I see it your way, but then I'm not fully convinced that they were spiritual languages either. Too many things in the verses that could well be colloquialisms.

Acts 2:4 is probably the key verse where Luke tells us that the 120 were able to able to (λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαι&#962 “speak with other tongues” (καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖ&#962 “as the Spirit gave them utterance”.

Here we see that the Holy Spirit was the agency of tongues where he enabled the assembled Believers to speak in other tongues. If the Holy Spirit had of enabled the unregenerate Jews to hear the Galileans first speaking in Aramaic where they then heard it in their own language, then Peter would not have told them that what they were hearing was the Holy Spirit speaking through the New Covenant people of God.

He would have had to explain to the unregenerate Jews that the Holy Spirit had fallen on them (being unregenerate) and not the Spirit filled members of the new Church which would have left the crowd at a bit of a loss wondering why the Holy Spirit was falling on them and not the followers of Jesus. Undoubtedly the Jews would have walked away thinking, “Well, God has certainly blessed the children of Israel by allowing the Spirit to provide us with an interpretation; too bad that these followers of Jesus could not do the same – where they would have walked away having dismissed these followers of Jesus as being of no account.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Here's my bit.

To answer the question about knowing who is an interpreter of tongues in the church: If you have been long enough in your church to be mature enough to give tongues messages and have them accepted, then you would know who these people are. If you haven't been here long enough to know, then maybe you need to become more established as a reliable and responsible member before you start giving messages in tongues, otherwise you could be wasting your energy and breath and having to deal with the rejection of no interpretation given.

I believe that experienced speakers in tongues know the difference between personal tongues which are spoken in private with God, and public tongues which need interpretation.

I know that it is true that some tongues are actual languages and I have at least two testimonies from personal friends of their tongues being recognised by overseas visitors. African Christians have experienced believers coming in from the bush having no contact with white people, getting baptised in the Spirit and speaking in pure Oxford English which no African English speaker could ever do without an accent.

1 Corinthians 14 is the definitive teaching on Tongues, and a literal reading will show that there are definitely public and private tongues. The trouble with those who want to doubt the validity of tongues is to emphasise the public use of tongues in a church meeting, and ignore Paul's comments about the use of private tongues. They want to make the Bible agree with their shonky theology about Tongues.

But that doesn't worry those who speak in Tongues and get great blessing from it.

People do what they believe. Those who don't believe in tongues will never speak it, so they will never know anything about it in actual practice. But those who believe in the power and blessing of using tongues in their private and public worship will do it enthusiastically receiving blessing and blessing those around them.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

First the bible says if there is no interpreter there speaker should be quite, but how do you know if there is someone in the congregation with the gift of interpretation, because you speak ?

It hit me the other day, that one of the PROBLEMS in the Corinthian Church, apparently was that many were "Showing off" with their tongues, and no interpretation has happening.

There's a DIFFERENCE between Speaking in a tongue "just because you feel like it", and being specifically BURDENED to speak in a tongue during a service as a MESSAGE to the congregation.

Just because you can speak English, doesn't mean that EVERYTHING you say is "Prophesy", after all.

It could be that Paul was telling the "Babblers" that, because there were no interpretations (Because God wasn't burdening any, because He hadn't commissioned and MESSAGES in tongues) - they WEREN'T SPeaking "Messages", and should just SHUT UP!!!!!

God isn't likely to Burden an Interpretation - for an utterance in tongues that wasn't never a "Message" to begin with.

 

[camphigrades]

This is a very helpful thread for someone like me...thank you for all the great, detailed answers. I'm very sad that I was never taught all this in church, but so excited to be learning about it now. Please pray that I would receive this gift. Thanks.

 

[Biblicist]

This is a very helpful thread for someone like me...thank you for all the great, detailed answers. I'm very sad that I was never taught all this in church, but so excited to be learning about it now. Please pray that I would receive this gift. Thanks.

It's great to see that the thread has been of assistance to you and I have absolutely no doubt that the Father would desire that all of his children (including you) would be able to praise him in the Spirit.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

This is a very helpful thread for someone like me...thank you for all the great, detailed answers. I'm very sad that I was never taught all this in church, but so excited to be learning about it now. Please pray that I would receive this gift. Thanks.

I don't need to pray for you. But I can tell you what to do.

1. Ask for the gift, because the Word says that everything by prayer and supplication ask of God. You have to do the asking.

2. Next, you are to receive it. He who asks, receives. You say to the Lord, "I now receive the gift".

God will not give you anything other than the gift you ask for. Jesus said "What father would give stones to a child who asks for bread? etc. God is a good God and therefore will not cheat you by giving you something different.

At this stage then, you have the gift of tongues. How do you know? Because the Word says, He who asks, receives." You have now received it. You have it and are able to exercise it.

Then you need to step out in the faith of what you have stated according to the asking and receiving that is in God's Word. Don't wait for some emotional experience because if you do you might receive a counterfeit, Exercising the gift requires faith. It is not something that is done to you in terms of some force coming into your mouth and tongue and making you speak a language. That only happens in spiritist seances.

So, on the basis of faith, you make up the language. It is good for you to think of an important prayer request and try to express your desire in a different language that you have never learned.

Some think that making up the language is not spiritual enough. But I ask, how else do you exercise faith? Waiting for something to be done to you is not faith because it takes over your freedom of choice and your will. When you make up a language, you are choosing to speak and therefore acting in faith.

The difference between speaking nonsense is who you are speaking to and why. If you are making up a language to speak to God about something that really burdens you, then you are acting in faith for the right reasons and therefore you will become fluent, speaking a language that God understands and appreciates.

Don't listen to anyone who would hinder you from doing this by conflicting ideas. That would not be the Holy Spirit. He wants to encourage you to use the gift and not discourage or confuse you. What I am giving you is the simplest and most effective way of receiving the gift of tongues. Those who really love you and want the best for you would want to encourage you to use your faith and get the blessing from it.

 

[MoreCoffee]

hi there

I have two questions regarding tongues ?

First the bible says if there is no interpreter there speaker should be quite, but how do you know if there is someone in the congregation with the gift of interpretation, because you speak ?

In saint Paul's time one could know that there was somebody able to interpret because one could know what language was being spoken. If what was said was not a language but some kind of non-linguistic-speech or an alleged angel's language then one would know that there is no interpreter available because no human being speaks or understand such speech.

Second, if a tongue is given in a heavenly language, how do you know that the interpretation is correct ? If you have no way to verify it - like you are able to in the event of a human language being supernaturally spoken ?

You don't know if what is presented after a message in tongues (I am speaking of contemporary speaking in tongues in meetings) is an interpretation of what was said in the tongue precisely because no human being is able to verify it and all claims to have a gift of discernment on the matter are equally impossible to verify. One is left with trust as the only source for acceptance of the interpretation and if trust will not do then one must leave it in doubt or reject it.

 

[Devorim]

I have read through this thread, and really, for me, it has been the most informative thread or discourse of any kind (that I have ever seen) about tongues.

However, I am not a believer in "tongues," other than that it simply means languages. When I write, "I do not have the gift of tongues," my real intention is that I am not talented in learning languages. I would never intend that "I do not have the gift of ecstatic utterances of either earthly or angelic languages."

First, I don't believe in human utterances of angelic languages. I cannot find that in the Bible at all. Just because it is mentioned does not, in my opinion, mean that people do that.

Second, I would like to call all ecstatic utterances in "tongues" fake. However, I can't, so I think that the majority of ecstatic utterances in "tongues" are fake. This is based upon my experience, which, as much as I would like to think it does, does not represent reality.

I was over 50 years in a tongues-speaking church, heard "tongues" being used through those years, and Not Once did I ever hear anyone interpret those tongues in that church -- at least not by a member. In fact, the only times (2-3) I heard someone try to interpret tongues, they were strangers and they were unceremoniously removed from the church or told publicly to be quiet. Hmmm.

So why is it a problem to which I return and return? Because I "spoke in tongues" once. Once. And at great protest. It made me very angry.

It was during my last year in that church, and the leadership had just forced the pastor out by lies and gossip. This particular church was absolutely riddled with the ugliest of sins, and they had a problem with the pastor because he was not like them. They got rid of him. On his last night there, I was in prayer at the altar, and I felt like G-d wanted me to speak in tongues. I strongly did not want to. We wrestled with this for a number of minutes, while I told G-d "NO!!" again and again. Not being used to telling G-d no about anything, I became ashamed and worn down. I reluctantly said, in prayer, "All right -- if You must." I didn't think He would do it to me. I believed He loved me too much.

But I suddenly reared up and spoke way too loudly, right out, in a language I did not know. Upset, I shut my mouth and refused to continue after what I thought were maybe 7-10 words. I put my head down, tried to understand why, and left the altar as soon as I could gather my thoughts. This was @1997, and it has never happened again.

The pastor left that church. Within a month, the youth pastor (good friends with the man who had been the pastor) was removed, and about 100 young people left and scattered!, leaving the church with a congregation of about 75. Within a year of that, the congregation dropped to about 25 (including my exit). More left, and now the church is closed, for sale for a couple years.

Well, that is what happened. I had felt I was being dishonest not admitting this. I don't understand it and perhaps may never understand it. I am just grateful that while I sometimes feel the H Spirit speaking through me, it is now always in English.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I have read through this thread, and really, for me, it has been the most informative thread or discourse of any kind (that I have ever seen) about tongues.

However, I am not a believer in "tongues," other than that it simply means languages. When I write, "I do not have the gift of tongues," my real intention is that I am not talented in learning languages. I would never intend that "I do not have the gift of ecstatic utterances of either earthly or angelic languages."

First, I don't believe in human utterances of angelic languages. I cannot find that in the Bible at all. Just because it is mentioned does not, in my opinion, mean that people do that.

Second, I would like to call all ecstatic utterances in "tongues" fake. However, I can't, so I think that the majority of ecstatic utterances in "tongues" are fake. This is based upon my experience, which, as much as I would like to think it does, does not represent reality.

I was over 50 years in a tongues-speaking church, heard "tongues" being used through those years, and Not Once did I ever hear anyone interpret those tongues in that church -- at least not by a member. In fact, the only times (2-3) I heard someone try to interpret tongues, they were strangers and they were unceremoniously removed from the church or told publicly to be quiet. Hmmm.

So why is it a problem to which I return and return? Because I "spoke in tongues" once. Once. And at great protest. It made me very angry.

It was during my last year in that church, and the leadership had just forced the pastor out by lies and gossip. This particular church was absolutely riddled with the ugliest of sins, and they had a problem with the pastor because he was not like them. They got rid of him. On his last night there, I was in prayer at the altar, and I felt like G-d wanted me to speak in tongues. I strongly did not want to. We wrestled with this for a number of minutes, while I told G-d "NO!!" again and again. Not being used to telling G-d no about anything, I became ashamed and worn down. I reluctantly said, in prayer, "All right -- if You must." I didn't think He would do it to me. I believed He loved me too much.

But I suddenly reared up and spoke way too loudly, right out, in a language I did not know. Upset, I shut my mouth and refused to continue after what I thought were maybe 7-10 words. I put my head down, tried to understand why, and left the altar as soon as I could gather my thoughts. This was @1997, and it has never happened again.

The pastor left that church. Within a month, the youth pastor (good friends with the man who had been the pastor) was removed, and about 100 young people left and scattered!, leaving the church with a congregation of about 75. Within a year of that, the congregation dropped to about 25 (including my exit). More left, and now the church is closed, for sale for a couple years.

Well, that is what happened. I had felt I was being dishonest not admitting this. I don't understand it and perhaps may never understand it. I am just grateful that while I sometimes feel the H Spirit speaking through me, it is now always in English.

I think that what was wrong in that church was something quite different than tongues. I think that jealousy and power games destroyed that church and because of the issues your perception of the gifts of the Spirit was corrupted. Not your fault. Speaking in tongues is very simple as I have said before in this thread. The idea that it it ecstatic is pure nonsense. Nowhere in the New Testament is it described that way. People look for ecstatic experiences and the devil is very helpful to provide them with one. I would put it to you that your experiences of observing the use of tongues in that church is totally opposed to the teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians 14. The ecstatic was what Paul was trying to stamp out in that church. Tongues simply is speaking a language in faith to express thing in the Spirit that can't be express in the learned native language. It is a spirit to spirit conversation with God. Nothing ecstatic or emotional about it. I am using the same set of quiet emotions the same as I am lying quietly on my bed typing this on my iPad. Nothing dramatic at all. Perhaps reading 1 Corinthians 14 without thinking "pentecostally" would help you undo that church's brainwashing so that you can read the chapter as it is without a "Pentecostalist" inrtpretation stopping you from seeing what Paul is really saying.

 

[Biblicist]

First, I don't believe in human utterances of angelic languages. I cannot find that in the Bible at all. Just because it is mentioned does not, in my opinion, mean that people do that.

I'm not sure where I can go with this as the Scriptures are our authority when it comes to the things of the Spirit.

Second, I would like to call all ecstatic utterances in "tongues" fake. However, I can't, so I think that the majority of ecstatic utterances in "tongues" are fake. This is based upon my experience, which, as much as I would like to think it does, does not represent reality.

Being someone who has been able to pray in the Spirit (tongues) since 1974, I fully agree that ‘ecstatic’ tongues are indeed fake, though I must admit that I have never come across this type of tongues, nor from memory have I ever met anyone else who has. An ‘ecstatic’ tongue (if they actually occur?) comes from someone who has no control of their senses where they are in some form of catatonic state. When we pray in tongues or praise God in tongues, they are never undertaken in an ecstatic state as the Believer is always in full control of his senses.


If we were to apply the descriptor ‘ecstatic’ to how we pray in the Spirit, then we would also have to apply this to a teacher when he is speaking words or concepts that the Spirit of God may have placed on his heart, though I doubt if we would be all that comfortable with saying that Pastor Smith is a superb ecstatic teacher.

I was over 50 years in a tongues-speaking church, heard "tongues" being used through those years, and Not Once did I ever hear anyone interpret those tongues in that church -- at least not by a member. In fact, the only times (2-3) I heard someone try to interpret tongues, they were strangers and they were unceremoniously removed from the church or told publicly to be quiet. Hmmm.

Now that definitely sounds like a very ‘unusual’ church indeed, you’ve done well to be able to stay there for 50 years.

 

[Devorim]

...reading this through a few times then sleeping on it. Thank you....

 

[Biblicist]

...reading this through a few times then sleeping on it. Thank you....

I liked that!

 

[camphigrades]

To Biblicist2 and Oscarr:

Thank you so, so much for your answers you gave to me specifically, which are exactly what I needed to hear. A simple encouragement to ask and receive, and then use the gift in faith. As I read each response, I could feel a strong desire and urge to do this ASAP. Thanks again.

 

[Devorim]

Still thinking and asking my husband questions.....

Thank you.

 

[Devorim]

This idea of speaking in tongues has bothered me for years, but this is the first time I have brought it up to my husband to this extent. As we talked, I learned he agrees a lot with some of you and with what I have been thinking. That’s good. That means we can converse about this and think

The following are my opinions:

I am going to be real honest with you here, and this may be offensive to some. It’s just that I am not interested in speaking in tongues for the sake of speaking in tongues. I believe that the H Spirit knows my native language and does not need to use a language I don’t know to get anyone’s attention. However, as on the Acts day of Pentecost, if there was someone who did not know G-d and did not know English, and He chose me to tell them the Good News, I would gladly submit to the H Spirit to speak to them in a language I do not know.

Regarding the word ecstatic and tongues, this is what my husband and I were used to: this is what we saw in the old church. I was horrified, for example, when I saw a lady I loved completely lose it, shouting out, acting out in an embarrassing way. Would the H Spirit do this? Really? Decades ago, when I asked a similar question, I was answered something like, “I would rather act a fool for the H Spirit than refuse Him.” That is not an answer.

Would the gentle H Spirit really desire one to look foolish for Him? I don’t find, in the Bible, that acting foolishly glorifies G-d in any way whatsoever. When the Bible says that some thought the disciples to be drunk, only in our imaginations do we translate that to mean they were acting like fools, because that is what we have seen in our time. Some of you (Biblicist, Oskarr, Bob Carabbio, Receiver, Itwin for example) have brought up the idea of order. That does not seem to be compatible with acting foolishly. The “acting foolishly” may be fun for some, but He is not a clown, and He is Holy G-d, NOT to be used to create a circus atmosphere. He deserves our complete respect!

I had mentioned in an earlier post that to my chagrin, in @ 1997, I had spoken in “tongues” once, on that pastors last night in that church — the pastor who had been removed through lies and gossip. I would rather be silent than speak in tongues because I want to make a spectacle of myself or have a good time. I very highly value the times I have spoken in English then wondered where that had come from, knowing I do not have either the wisdom or intelligence to say what I’d said. My husband agreed. He said he had also experienced this.

So bottom line: I have a lot to learn, and I intend to learn. Retirement is less than a month away now, and I look forward to using my new-found time studying.

Thank you SO MUCH, everyone.

 

[camphigrades]

I'm no expert on this subject by any means, but as for acting "foolish"...remember that when the Holy Spirit fell on the disciples/first Christians, people on the street heard and saw them and thought they were, literally, drunk.

Blessings to you as you work this out between you & God. xo