@DeepThought
there is a simple explanation for this foolishness of tongue speaking.
when peter spoke to the many he was in a city that was a commercial hub. many
people from many areas were in the public square. so when they accepted peter's invitation to become a jesus follower or they liked something he said they all spoke up in different dialects or in different tongues.
that is all there is to it.
it is like the alleged miracle about the pool where the lame man waited but who could never get into the healing pool because someone who was not lame always got there first.
it was a pool built over an irregular artesian well. it bubbled up at odd times. the bubbling did not mean that it was a time for healing. it was just an irregular artesian well built into a pool.
believe in Heavenly Father for good reasons. Do not believe in Him because you accept the folkways written into the Old Testament.
Heavenly Father is far greater than what a roving nomadic, later imprisoned tribe wrote down in a foreign capital ( babylon ) centuries after the events.
good night and good luck
the humble kitty
@mister-moggy said
@DeepThought
there is a simple explanation for this foolishness of tongue speaking.
when peter spoke to the many he was in a city that was a commercial hub. many
people from many areas were in the public square. so when they accepted peter's invitation to become a jesus follower or they liked something he said they all spoke up in different dialects or in diffe ...[text shortened]... eign capital ( babylon ) centuries after the events.
good night and good luck
the humble kitty
when peter spoke to the many he was in a city that was a commercial hub. many people from many areas were in the public square. so when they accepted peter's invitation to become a jesus follower or they liked something he said they all spoke up in different dialects or in different tongues.This reminds me of the Tower of Babel story somewhat. I'll look into the notion at some point, I've an idea there's neurological explanations of "speaking in tongues", as I'm not aware of cases where the "speaker" had no prior knowledge of the language they were speaking in, or else that the language existed.
@fmf saidHaving been in churches in the southern US, I have witnessed it. I never felt that it was insincere or a performance. I think people can be so carried away in an ecstatic state that they speak in utterances that I don’t understand. Whenever that was happening, I either kept very quiet or took the opportunity to softly chant in meditation and no on ever questioned it.
Has anyone witnessed people "speaking in tongues"? If so, what did you make of it?
As a western Sufi, I have turned with communities of dervishes to the point of an altered state. I take speaking in tongues in the same vein...and it is likely akin to my meditative transcriptions and my dad’s counting by prime numbers. I don’t really know that I have yet assigned it to a Divine state as in communing with a god...”I don’t know” is as valid as anything else and i feel its a very personal experience that one may or may not wish to share.
@fmf said“Insincere” glossilalia might be used by those who don’t really have the mindset of ecstatic presence and are using it in such a way as to take advantage of those who believe that there is divine ecstatic presence. It’s about intent which is a difficult thing to detect. In my opinion where discernment fails, healthy doubt is a wise response, especially when the the speaker has a hand out asking for money...otherwise it’s simply a curious phenomenon to me.
What would constitute "insincere" glossolalia and how might one recognize it?
@secondson saidWhat do you believe causes non-authentic glossolalia?
Yes. It made me feel uncomfortable as I didn't get a sense that it was authentic.
@fmf saidI’ve witnessed people speaking in tongues many times and a variety of places by people I know personally and total strangers.
Has anyone witnessed people "speaking in tongues"? If so, what did you make of it?
I have on different occasions found myself feeling curious about it, somewhat repulsed by it and I am undecided of the authenticity of it doctrinally and therefore in actuality.
I have never felt myself to be spiritually moved by these utterances and so I remain an unimpressed but objective observer.
@whodey saidWhy do you frequently use triteness and glibness as defence mechanisms when regarding topics you are uncomfortable discussing?
Don't know, I never use my tongue to speak.
@divegeester
the latter=day=saints ( mormons to you'all ) spoke in tongues during the kirtland period. someone would get up and speak in tongues and then, unbelievably, another person would get up an translate it. the church still officially beleives in the speaking of tongues but i have never seen it in a ward and if they tried that in general conference there would be a dead silence of anxiety among the faithful.
speaking in tongues took place in a protestant church in the 1980's for a few years. i recall it being in toronto. it began as barking ( like dogs ) and for months the barking grew among the faithful, each trying to show that they too had the holy spirit ( by barking as well ). eventually it went away.
it is all fake in that it does not really occur, it only occurs as a type of hysteria that other worshippers are either too embarrassed to stop or feel they must compete with in order to appear holy as well ( they too are full of the holy ghost ).
@mister-moggy saidYour first paragraph contains a claim which is incorrect.
@divegeester
the latter=day=saints ( mormons to you'all ) spoke in tongues during the kirtland period. someone would get up and speak in tongues and then, unbelievably, another person would get up an translate it. the church still officially beleives in the speaking of tongues but i have never seen it in a ward and if they tried that in general conference there woul ...[text shortened]... feel they must compete with in order to appear holy as well ( they too are full of the holy ghost ).
There is no “official” position of the Christian church. Each denomination holds it own views and some hold the speaking of tongues to be fake and even devilish.
Your second paragraph contains mixture of truth and error.
The Toronto blessing experience did indeed include some people behaving in an animalistic manner and one expression of this phenomena was indeed barking. However this extreme manifestation of strangeness is not associated with the church mainstream understanding of speaking in tongues. In fact the Toronto blessing movement has been largely exposed as erroneous and/or as some claim, even demonic. Speaking in tongues remains a separate manifestation.
Your third paragraph is just your opinion based on paragraphs 1 and 2 and should be viewed accordingly.