Are Tongues Real?

[Originalist]

How can we prove it? Are they known phonetic languages? Are we sure that what we are calling tongues are the same tongues mentioned in Acts?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

How can we prove it? Are they known phonetic languages? Are we sure that what we are calling tongues are the same tongues mentioned in Acts?

I have personally spoken in Urdu when speaking in tongues and that was verified by a missionary to Pakistan and India.

[good samaritan]

I think that faith is the fundamental of our walk with God from beginning to end. We all probably have been guilty of second guessing our own experience with God. We can only point to the scriptures of Spirit baptism examples. If someone doesn’t want to believe it there is no indisputable facts we can give that will change that. At the same time I think apostolics have been guilty of pushing tongues as an accomplishment we must achieve for salvation. Instead we should be teaching it is a promise to every true believer.

[Bro Flame]

I've heard testimonies about how people have spoken in tongues and people of different nationalities have heard words spoken fluently in a language the individual speaking in tongues didn't know.

I've also had someone tell me that she didn't believe speaking in tongues to be a legitimate language. She wasn't discrediting the reality of speaking in tongues because she did so herself, but she felt that "tongues" were simply that -- "tongues" we used to "pray in the Spirit" towards God.

Are tongues real?

Yes, they are real. As following the doctrines of the New Testament church, we believe that it is God's promise unto us to be filled with the Holy Ghost. All Biblical infillings of the Holy Ghost were evidenced by speaking in other tongues. Our experience should not be expected to be any different.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

How can we prove it? Are they known phonetic languages? Are we sure that what we are calling tongues are the same tongues mentioned in Acts?

Glossalalia, or "speaking with tongues", is not speaking known languages:

1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

This is why "interpretation of tongues" is a supernatural gift.

In Acts ch 2, all the disciples were speaking in tongues BEFORE any crowd showed up. When they did show up, EACH visitor heard THE DISCIPLES speaking in HIS OWN language, the language/dialect of the visitor. This is not biologically or anatomically possible and so it was a supernatural intervention by God to cause the visitors to HEAR in their own native languages.

If God wants to cause a person to speak in a foreign but known existing language He certainly can do it, but that is not what was happening in Acts.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Glossalalia, or "speaking with tongues", is not speaking known languages:

1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

This is why "interpretation of tongues" is a supernatural gift.

In Acts ch 2, all the disciples were speaking in tongues BEFORE any crowd showed up. When they did show up, EACH visitor heard THE DISCIPLES speaking in HIS OWN language, the language/dialect of the visitor. This is not biologically or anatomically possible and so it was a supernatural intervention by God to cause the visitors to HEAR in their own native languages.

If God wants to cause a person to speak in a foreign but known existing language He certainly can do it, but that is not what was happening in Acts.

Thank you for explaining something I've wondered about forever.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I have personally spoken in Urdu when speaking in tongues and that was verified by a missionary to Pakistan and India.

That is quite the experience.

When I read your post, I wasn't sure what the Urdu language was. That evening I started a book about the life of John Hyde, one of the first languages he learned as a Missionary was Urdu.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by Originalist

How can we prove it? Are they known phonetic languages? Are we sure that what we are calling tongues are the same tongues mentioned in Acts?

Could you please be a little more specific with the meaning behind "same".

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Glossalalia, or "speaking with tongues", is not speaking known languages:

1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

This is why "interpretation of tongues" is a supernatural gift.

In Acts ch 2, all the disciples were speaking in tongues BEFORE any crowd showed up. When they did show up, EACH visitor heard THE DISCIPLES speaking in HIS OWN language, the language/dialect of the visitor. This is not biologically or anatomically possible and so it was a supernatural intervention by God to cause the visitors to HEAR in their own native languages.

If God wants to cause a person to speak in a foreign but known existing language He certainly can do it, but that is not what was happening in Acts.

Well said brother.

[diakonos]

I guess that explains why some people fill their R’s every other syllable.