Speaking in tongues

Could you perhaps post a link to one such video or study? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of 'tongues-speech' that have been recorded, transcribed, studied and analyzed (including some I've done myself) - not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

This is an argument I've heard before - i.e. that I'm trying to analyze and study something spiritual in 'human' terms, or some such thing. Modern tongues-speech is something which is very concrete and tangible, there's no debating that. It can be, and has been, studied and analyzed with all results essentially drawing the same conclusions. There's absolutely nothing any tongues-speaker is doing that cannot be explained in natural, linguistic terms.

Yes, I agree 100% - as I mention in previous posts on this thread; tongues-speakers are very keen on describing the experience and, said experience is, to many, almost miraculous. Indeed, for those that use it, it is very psychologically fulfilling. It’s almost like primal screaming. When people practice ‘tongues’, they feel a sense of sweet release in that all stress can be gone after the experience.

People can describe the experience, but in examining the “mechanics” behind it…yeah, not so much. When a person has experienced tongues, s/he is absolutely convinced as to the ‘scripturalness’ of his/her experience and the correctness of his/her doctrinal beliefs – this, despite the overwhelming scriptural absence of anything remotely akin to it.

Mind you, I'm not doubting or questioning the 'experience'; as mentioned, glossolalia as the tool that it is, can be very powerful. It is important to note however that this same statement can be made for virtually any other culture that practices glossolalia.

Could you perhaps post a link to one such video or study? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of 'tongues-speech' that have been recorded, transcribed, studied and analyzed (including some I've done myself) - not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

This is an argument I've heard before - i.e. that I'm trying to analyze and study something spiritual in 'human' terms, or some such thing. Modern tongues-speech is something which is very concrete and tangible, there's no debating that. It can be, and has been, studied and analyzed with all results essentially drawing the same conclusions. There's absolutely nothing any tongues-speaker is doing that cannot be explained in natural, linguistic terms.

not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

Thank you for your valuable feedback. It matches my own analysis.

Well, as one internet writer put it (rather bluntly) “People who claim to speak in tongues need to understand that they are making a testable claim. The claim has been tested, numerous times. And the tongues speakers have failed the test, every single time.”

It's a rather blunt statement, but it's a true one.

There are thousands of languages in the world, but not one sounds like anything tongues-speakers are producing. "Tongues" simply mimic language oftentimes based on what the speaker envisions such a 'heavenly language' to sound like.

As one linguist put it: “Among us (Linguists), we have heard many hundreds of languages. Furthermore, we have heard representative languages in virtually every group of related languages in the world. At worst we may have missed a few small groups in the interior of South America or in New Guinea. I would estimate that the chances are at least even that if a glossolalic utterance were in a known language, one of us would either recognize the language or recognize that it is similar to some language we are acquainted with."

He further makes this challenge: "Get two recordings, one of a glossolalic utterance and the other in a real language remote from anything I have ever heard. I'm confident that in just a few moments I could tell which is which and why I am sure of it."

As a Linguist, I completely concur with his challenge - real language is unmistakable, as is glossolalia.

Well, as one internet writer put it (rather bluntly) “People who claim to speak in tongues need to understand that they are making a testable claim. The claim has been tested, numerous times. And the tongues speakers have failed the test, every single time.”

It's a rather blunt statement, but it's a true one.

There are thousands of languages in the world, but not one sounds like anything tongues-speakers are producing. "Tongues" simply mimic language oftentimes based on what the speaker envisions such a 'heavenly language' to sound like.

As one linguist put it: “Among us (Linguists), we have heard many hundreds of languages. Furthermore, we have heard representative languages in virtually every group of related languages in the world. At worst we may have missed a few small groups in the interior of South America or in New Guinea. I would estimate that the chances are at least even that if a glossolalic utterance were in a known language, one of us would either recognize the language or recognize that it is similar to some language we are acquainted with."

He further makes this challenge: "Get two recordings, one of a glossolalic utterance and the other in a real language remote from anything I have ever heard. I'm confident that in just a few moments I could tell which is which and why I am sure of it."

As a Linguist, I completely concur with his challenge - real language is unmistakable, as is glossolalia.

Could you perhaps post a link to one such video or study? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of 'tongues-speech' that have been recorded, transcribed, studied and analyzed (including some I've done myself) - not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

This is an argument I've heard before - i.e. that I'm trying to analyze and study something spiritual in 'human' terms, or some such thing. Modern tongues-speech is something which is very concrete and tangible, there's no debating that. It can be, and has been, studied and analyzed with all results essentially drawing the same conclusions. There's absolutely nothing any tongues-speaker is doing that cannot be explained in natural, linguistic terms.

Could you perhaps post a link to one such video or study? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of 'tongues-speech' that have been recorded, transcribed, studied and analyzed (including some I've done myself) - not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

This is an argument I've heard before - i.e. that I'm trying to analyze and study something spiritual in 'human' terms, or some such thing. Modern tongues-speech is something which is very concrete and tangible, there's no debating that. It can be, and has been, studied and analyzed with all results essentially drawing the same conclusions. There's absolutely nothing any tongues-speaker is doing that cannot be explained in natural, linguistic terms.

not one has ever been found to be anything but non-cognitive, non-language utterance.

Thank you for your valuable feedback. It matches my own analysis.

It’s almost like primal screaming

Primal" baby talk gibberish" screaming. Preposterous.

I think you misunderstood – it doesn’t refer to speaking a specific language at all. “(Praying) in the Spirit” means as I have described it earlier - Praying in the Spirit does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.

Most untrue. Your unbelief. You are not understanding the scriptures you cite.
Read the scriptures with honesty and these verses do not support your assertions; your unbelief.

A Call to Persevere
17 But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.
18 They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.”
19 It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.
20 But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit,
21 keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.
22 And have mercy on those who doubt;
23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear,
hating even the garment stained by the flesh.
Jude 1: ESV
verse 20 "but you" those who have the indwelling Holy Spirit and the signs following, including speaking in unknown tongue,
keep the faith against the scoffers and keep on praying in tongues, praying in the Holy Ghost

Why? Because when we pray in tongues we confirm the truth of the original gospel preached by Jesus himself and the Apostles;
and, we allow the power and truth of the Spirit of God to work within us and to cleanse us and empower the inner person over
our carnal selves.
Those without the Holy Spirit obviously cannot pray in the Spirit, they can only pray with their understanding.

Should you decide to post an upload of evidence to the contrary you are welcome to do so.

“Speaking in tongues” is just “speaking in languages”, which I do all the time. “Tongues” as used by Christians is glossolalia (meant in the linguistic sense of random free vocalization). I do use glossolalia on occasion as well, but not in a Christian context. Though I may use it on occasion, I'm fully aware of what it is.

The thing is, is that while there are many things in religion that must be taken on faith alone (they can neither be proven nor disproven), “tongues” is just not one of these things; it’s something very concrete and very tangible. The phenomenon can be, and has been, studied extensively.

Modern tongues themselves is entirely self-created non-cognitive, non-language utterance. Whether spoken by a Christian here in the US or by a shaman in some remote part of the world – it’s all produced the exact same way.

It’s how this unique tool is used and the experience(s) it creates which define its importance and place in various religious beliefs that practice it.

As I’ve mentioned – is this phenomenon that Christians are doing evidenced/’proofed’ in the Bible? No, it’s not. Does that fact it’s not there make it somehow wrong to use? No, of course not; it’s a very powerful spiritual tool, which is clearly attested by many that use it. But a self-created tool nonetheless. There’s just nothing mysterious or divine in the mechanics of producing modern tongues.

I don’t believe I’ve ever commented on how they should be used – that’s totally up to the individual practitioner and what they believe to be correct according to their beliefs. No argument there.

One of my pet peeves are those who say we do not need prophecy to define the things of God not seen. If it feels good make a noise.

Well then whose business is it if God word is not involved in what the sign represents and who it points to? I simply do not believe sign are required to believe God who has no form. We are to walk by faith the unseen Holy place of God.

Why did God assign a sign the to Jews in Isaiah 28 and confirm it by defining who it points to in 1 Corinthians 14? Then we can look at it with a better understanding. The tongues doctrine is not founded in the new testament . If we destroy the foundation of the doctrine .How would we ever expect to understand what it was given for in the first place

Below is the law. What does the sign confirm?

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corinthians 14:21-22

I am no scholar but it does not seem that difficult to understand. Why turn things upside down and take away the understanding of God by this oral tradition of men?

Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no "understanding"?

Come to my church and enjoy a true disciplined worship meeting and you will directly see and hear for yourself
diversity of tongues followed immediately by an interpretation; up to three times in succession:
then up to three gifts of spoken prophecy
All through the work of the Holy Spirit in the body of Christ in full accordance with the instructions given by Paul himself in
1Corinthians 14.

“Speaking in tongues” is just “speaking in languages”, which I do all the time. “Tongues” as used by Christians is glossolalia (meant in the linguistic sense of random free vocalization). I do use glossolalia on occasion as well, but not in a Christian context. Though I may use it on occasion, I'm fully aware of what it is.

The thing is, is that while there are many things in religion that must be taken on faith alone (they can neither be proven nor disproven), “tongues” is just not one of these things; it’s something very concrete and very tangible. The phenomenon can be, and has been, studied extensively.

Modern tongues themselves is entirely self-created non-cognitive, non-language utterance. Whether spoken by a Christian here in the US or by a shaman in some remote part of the world – it’s all produced the exact same way.

It’s how this unique tool is used and the experience(s) it creates which define its importance and place in various religious beliefs that practice it.

As I’ve mentioned – is this phenomenon that Christians are doing evidenced/’proofed’ in the Bible? No, it’s not. Does that fact it’s not there make it somehow wrong to use? No, of course not; it’s a very powerful spiritual tool, which is clearly attested by many that use it. But a self-created tool nonetheless. There’s just nothing mysterious or divine in the mechanics of producing modern tongues.

I don’t believe I’ve ever commented on how they should be used – that’s totally up to the individual practitioner and what they believe to be correct according to their beliefs. No argument there.

Most untrue. Your unbelief. You are not understanding the scriptures you cite.
Read the scriptures with honesty and these verses do not support your assertions; your unbelief.

A Call to Persevere
17 But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.
18 They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.”
19 It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.
20 But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit,
21 keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.
22 And have mercy on those who doubt;
23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear,
hating even the garment stained by the flesh.
Jude 1: ESV
verse 20 "but you" those who have the indwelling Holy Spirit and the signs following, including speaking in unknown tongue,
keep the faith against the scoffers and keep on praying in tongues, praying in the Holy Ghost

Why? Because when we pray in tongues we confirm the truth of the original gospel preached by Jesus himself and the Apostles;
and, we allow the power and truth of the Spirit of God to work within us and to cleanse us and empower the inner person over
our carnal selves.
Those without the Holy Spirit obviously cannot pray in the Spirit, they can only pray with their understanding.

Here's your question again.
The topic on that page was prophecy.

Actually, a deceived person isn't lying at all. They are telling you what they believe to be the truth.
That is not lying.

That was before the last new revelation.(Revelation 22) Do you have something to add to it?

We can still be eager to prophesy even through we do have the whole or perfect. But new prophecy (tongues) no need. What for, a sign that points to those who refuse to hear prophecy in any language ?