Question about tongues

[Arphaxad]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

BINGO! You just got a revelation!

a while back, but almost everyone i mentioned this to kind of pushed it aside.


ARPH

[ChristopherHall]

There was a story I heard out of New York. A preacher was preaching and stopped and spoke in tongues during one point in the sermon. After the service a man asked him, "Where did you learn Italian? That was a beautiful prayer!" The preacher said, "I don't know Italian. I'm not sure what you're talking about." The man went on to explain that he heard the preacher speak in Italian. Later the tape was listened to. Italian was found no where on the tape. Where the one man heard Italian, the tape only had the preacher speaking in unintelligible tongues.

This gift cannot be forced. It only manifests as God desires. That was God trying to speak to that Italian man.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Arphaxad

I do, in Acts 2 it says that "everyone heard them speak in his own language"v6 and "how is it that we hear, each in our own language"v8and"we hear them speaking in our own tongues''v11. than v13 says-Others mocking said" They are full of new wine". Can it be that the apostles were speaking in tongues and those that were meant to understand heard them in thier own languages, but the mockers didn't and thought that they were drunk and babling some unintelligable sounds?
and in ch 10:46"For they heard them speak in tongues and magnify God."
How did they know that thay magnifying God unless some that went with Peter heard them in theur own language.

just a couple things to ponder on................



ARPH

Interesting.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Arphaxad

a while back, but almost everyone i mentioned this to kind of pushed it aside.


ARPH

I know. People think on a very basic level. They read Acts 2 and see the Apostles actually speaking in these languages. Well let's look at their logic. We see...

Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mesopotamians, Judaeans, Cappadocians, Pontians, Asians, Phrygians, Pamphylians, Egyptians, Libyans, Cryrenians, Romans, Jews, Cretes, and Arabians.

That's 17 language groups. That would mean that out of the 120 at least a group of 7 spoke one of these languages. That means 7 spoke Parthian, 7 spoke Median, 7 spoke Elamite, etc, etc. Because one person cannot speak but one language at a time. I can't speak both English and French at the same time. And if each man shifted from one language to the other 17 times it would hardly be enough to expound upon the wonderful works of God in any intelligible fashion. Also it wouldn't have been miraculous to the hearer...the hearer would only think, "Hey, they know Parthian."

BUT...if they all realized they were each hearing every man in their own language...now that would be a miracle. I can see the Parthians looking at the Medians (and saying in the common tongue they all shared, most likely Aramaic, for they were all Jewish converts come to Pentecost festival), "Wow, those guys speak very good Parthian." Then the Medes would reply, "Wait, they weren't speaking Parthian, they were speaking Mede!" Suddenly they would be wowed by the fact that each of them are hearing the group in their own language.

Look at this verse closely folks,

"And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" - Acts 2:8

That was the miracle folks. Anyone could learn two or three languages and speak in them moving from one to another. The real issue is that the listeners each heard every man in their own tongue. Now that was a noteworthy miracle!

[pelathais]

There is a problem that I see some times when it comes to people's expectations of speaking in tongues. Of course, my own view is built up around my own experiences.

I had some "charismatic" guys try to coax me into speaking in tongues once when I was a kid. It ended up going no where. When I finally did receive the Holy Ghost (it was "finally" for me, but ocurred after my first visit to a UPC church) the "speaking in tongues" came like a wave that washed over me. It was great. There was no "progression" from "stammering lips" to "speaking in tongues."

It was only later that I began to hear some Apostolic people describe the "stammering lips" as being a precursor to speaking in tongues. I also heard folks talk about how that you could "have the Holy Ghost all over you" but not be "baptised." "You're almost there," they would say to people. This confused me.

The phrase "stammering lips" appears in Isaiah 28:11 and is then translated and quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14:21. In both passages the phrase means "other languages." It does not describe a "process" of receiving the Holy Ghost, but rather is a way of describing foreign languages, albeit in a rather politically incorrect manner.

In the ancient world there was actually a great deal of "prophecy" or ecstatic utterences involved in a large number of religions. There is a famous account of an Egyptian official visiting Byblos in Lebanon. The Egyptian is robbed by one of his own crew men who then flees into the city and hides. The Egyptian protests to the rulers of Byblos who call on their "prophets" for help. A scene of "tongues and interpretation" follows and ultimately, because he was robbed by one of his own crew, the Egyptian is told that he's basically out of luck.

The high priestess at Delphi in Greece is another example of ecstatic speech. She was called the "Pythia" because when she spoke in a trance it was heard to have a lot of lisping sounds. When she was consulted, as famously by Agamemnon and Menelaus in the Illiad, she would speak incomprehensibly to the unitiated but was understood by the priests. For a few gold coins (or a lot) the priests would provide an interpretation. Themistocles gained valuable information from this oracle and was able to save the people of Athens thanks to the Pythia's prophecy during the Persian invasions in 480 B.C.

The Old Testament describes "the prophets" and "sons of the prophets" speaking ecstatically. Saul famously prophesied (1 Samuel 10). There is no indication that this "prophecy" was speech that was intended to be understood necessarily by "outsiders." The prophets spoke in ecstatic utterences and praised God. In the case of Saul, "the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee, and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man" (1 Samuel 10:6).

Critics of speaking in tongues will often try to say that the "tongues" are not "languages" and that even when an interpretation is given, the interpretation is often far more complex and much longer than the "tongues." But I think these critics err in expecting to always see a one-to-one correlation between tongues and interpretation. Also, I think it is an error to expect the "language" of speaking tongues to contain obvious syntax and grammar. The Bible doesn't make these claims for the experience, so why should anyone else?

In a study that I read of this past year (I'll try and find the reference) MRI and CAT scans were done of the brains of people who were speaking in their everyday language and of those who were "speaking in tongues." Now, the authors of the study didn't provide a lot of background info on the subjects involved, so I'm just left to assume that the "tongues speakers" were genuine and sincere. In any event, they found that two different parts of the brain lit up when the person was speaking. One part when they spoke in tongues, and the expected region that had been mapped long ago lit up when they spoke naturally.

[chseeads]

Then it's really not so much speaking in tongues, it's hearing in tongues.

[Arphaxad]

Originally Posted by chseeads

Then it's really not so much speaking in tongues, it's hearing in tongues.

its speaking in tongues and someone else hearing in thier own language.


ARPH

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by chseeads

Then it's really not so much speaking in tongues, it's hearing in tongues.

The miracle is that the spirit tongue break the language barrier and all hear in their own language.

[chseeads]

The miracle is speaking in tongues period, because that happens everywhere. It's much more a rarity if anybody were to hear tongues in their own language. All the Biblical references focus on the speaking being the point, not the hearing.

[ChristopherHall]

pelathais, here's the science article,

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1030183100.htm

They established that the areas of the brain active in speaking and singing were not as active in subjects speaking in tongues...the conclusion...the subjects aren't the one's speaking.