The Pentecostal phenomenon of "speaking in tongues" has created widespread controversy among modern Christendom today. Without the knowledge of the truth, which only comes to an honest heart by divine revelation, many have misunderstood the purpose of tongues. Do not be confused by theories and ideas of men; learn the truth about this important subject.

Tongues is a controversy only in the fringe groups that don't really have a good handle on their Bibles. Confusion is what there's plenty of, that's for sure, and divine revelation comes in many flavours.

INITIAL EVIDENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISM - Isaiah prophesied, "With stammering lips and ANOTHER TONGUE will he speak to this people." Is. 28:11. In the great commission, Jesus said, "And these signs shall follow them that believe...they shall speak with NEW TONGUES." Mark 16:17.

Proof-texting? When Israel hears a people of a "strange tongue" which were the Babylonians who came to conquer destroy Judah and take them captive. By hearing those who spoke in another language then the people would know that God's judgment had arrived upon them ! Isaiah 28:12, "To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear." It was the rest and the refreshing but they would not hear... they would not hear.. and therefore the enemy with a different tongue came and destroyed them.

Mark 16 - The passage, teaches that some Christians may speak in tongues. Others may cast out demons. Others still may be involved in the range of supernatural effects that are described, but these effects are simply one part of what it is that demonstrates the uniqueness of the Christian Church as a group separate to and from every other group. The signs aren't individual promises, they're corporate predictions (Ian).

"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the SOUND thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is everyone that is born of the Spirit." John 3:8. As the sound of wind blowing is the evidence of its presence, so is the sound of speaking in tongues evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism.

Does everyone get a cloven flame of fire above their head also? This Sound=Tongues is an assumption - that one's personal experience is the standard by which to accurately interpret biblical context. In other words, the Bible is to be read through personal experience, rather than personal experience being read through the Bible. This is significant. On the day of Pentecost, the miraculous speaking in human languages, each one being understood by members of the assembled audience, was but one of three remarkable audio-visual ?signs'. The first was the sound of a violent wind, with there being no wind. The second was the visible manifestation of flame, a fire which parted over the apostles, yet without burning them. The third and final sign was the praising of God in supernaturally acquired, humanly recognisable languages. (read more...)

Its advocates were quickly expelled from the established churches, whereupon they established the Pentecostal churches. For 50 years it remained the almost exclusive possession of the Pentecostal churches.

Uttering gibberish that is interpreted as profound mystical insight by holy men is an ancient practice. In Greece, even the priest of Apollo, god of light, engaged in prophetic babbling. The ancient Israelites did it. So did the Jansenists, the Quakers, the Methodists, and the Shakers.

Such a marvelous experience as the baptism of the Holy Ghost demands a marvelous evidence. So God chase to speak through the believer in a language foreign to him as the outward evidence of the marvelous infilling of the Holy Ghost!

That would be marvelous, but apart from anecdotal evidence all we see of this amazing evidence nowadays is people speaking in absolute gibberish that only God can understand, logically, he'd have to understand you even if you pray without making an audible vocalisation.

Also these tongues differ in operation. The gift of tongues in the church is limited to two or three messages, and that by course; and one must interpret. I Cor. 14:27. But the tongues as evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism is an unlimited manifestation and requires no interpretation. Paul said, "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

These devotional tongues are also for the personal edification of the believer. They are for self-encouragement and uplifting of his spirit. Paul said, "He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself..." I Cor. 14:4. So the apostle gladly stated, "I thank my Gad, I speak with tongues more than ye all." I Cor. 14:18.

Paul could have been saying that he spoke in more languages than you all. That sort of information would be more likely to be made known if he was a man who talked to a lot of people of many dialects because as we know, many races and religions were gathered in Corinth. It was a major center of trade and commerce for many peoples from many countries. The influx of other cultures and people gave the city a bit of a mess and deviations from the gospel Paul was setting up would have likely happened in his abscence. There were church members of varying skills too, from "called to be saints" and some who were "sanctified" and "babes in Christ." etc etc. It was a church in flux.

You know how some people are incessant name droppers who mention that they know someone important all the time and you just roll your eyes at them. "Oh, I went to pastor soandso's house for dinner and pastor soandso said this and said that..." It boosts their pride to be associated with something they perceive to be important.

Tongues is like that. Revheads et al. love to name drop tongues every chance they get as if it's the special connection to Jesus that they, the special elected holy ones, have got through amazing intelligence, luck and blessing. They're addicted to it. Every testimony, every meeting, every time they go out street harassing... we got tongues... isn't tongues great... the devil can't understand tongues, it's a secret code to God... you get more blessed when u pray in tongues... you can't pray in the spirit without it... your car will start better with it.

In my experience with RF/RCI  et al. they believe there are five very different types of people and are very quick to  pigeon-hole everyone into one of these five (the pastors deny it but I've spoken to enough, even this year, to see that the mindset is still at large)... this is in order of the best category to the worst:

1. Sensible blessed christians who speak in tongues - The good ones who definitely equate tongues with salvation... and preach it as such. No matter how awful you are... as long as you got the special evidence you're ok by them.
2. Mislead wolves - those who have been able to speak in tongues but don't equate it with salvation or preach it's necessity, thereby condemning possible converts with a false doctrine of wishy washiness (and people who leave mustongue churches are also in this category - ME! Hi!).
3. Christian wannabes - the people who say they are christians but have never spoken in tongues... and, even though they may help the sick and do great things by their fellow man, and love and believe in Jesus and his gospel with all their heart, are only fooling themselves by pretending to be holy. (Revheads hope and justify and wonder if those wannabes actually possibly probably spoke in tongues by accident at some stage.. they MUST have...)
4. Worldlies - People who have never spoken in tongues and who don't follow the bible. People who need saving... get 'em in the tank... get their lips stammering... then everything will be okay. Money will fall out of the sky and pimples will clear up.
5. Catholics - just plain evil... bwahahahaha
6. People who don't indicate at roundabouts. - Had to throw in a sixth for good measure. THESE are the people I'm trying to convert.

Our kids used to do Skits on Sunday nights where the wishy washy Christians were put into a washing machine and sprinkled with tonguesoap to wash them right. Sounds so much like the kids I saw in a KKK documentry. A stark and horrible comparison (sorry... eek) but still, the hate being taught towards other humans at a young age towards people who are perceived as different is much more than horrifying.

Non-Christians speak in tongues, too.

Speaking in tongues is much older than Paul.

It comes from the Pythoness of the Oracle at Delphi. How it worked was you made a large donation to the Temple of Apollo and you got the ask the Pythoness a single question. She would the pray to the God Apollo at a fissure at the altar. Recently tested it was found that a mildly toxic gas was, and still is, emitted from this crack in the Earth. The Oracle is over the junction of two earthquake faults. She, the Pythoness, would start dancing around and babbling incoherently. A Priest of the temple would "translate" what the Pythoness had said. She was speaking the speech of the gods and was getting all her information from Apollo.

The Oracle at Delphi started in the 400s BC, when Greece was at its strongest. It continued into the Roman era as if it was a parody of its former self, so the members of the churches of Greece and Asia Minor would have been very familiar with how Delphi worked. It was a shrine of the Greek god Apollo. In response to someone's questions, a priestess would go into a frenzy and start babbling. An attendant priest would then 'translate' the babble into some glittering generalities that could in some way be understood as an answer. Some of the best-known features of Greek philosophy streamed out from the Oracle's early years (for instance, it bred the saying "Know Yourself"); the great Greek philosophers were very good at finding jewels in waste water. The cult of Dionysis used rhythmic music, whirling dances, alcohol and/or herbal drugs, and magic spells to send peoples' souls out of their body (Greek ek stasis ) and into the presence of whatever deity or sub-deity was involved; this too sometimes caused strange sounds.

African animists, too, have long had ecstatic speech in their religions. But, just as glossolalia among Jews marked one as a prophet, glossolalia caused most African animists to foist onto the speaker the role of religious leader or priest, a heavy spiritual and cultural responsibility to lay upon an unprepared person. Wherever they have happened in the past, glossolalia and other extraordinary 'spiritual' happenings have not been, and have not really been allowed to be, a thing 'of the people', which could be a part of the otherwise-normal life of otherwise-ordinary people.

Deep in the gnostic book-hoard at Nag Hammadi, archaeologists discovered what may be the earliest, and perhaps one of the strangest, written instances of glossolalia. (Gnosticism arose at the same time as Christianity, and Gnostics were skilled at melding Christian devotions and spirituality to the un-Christian Gnostic framework -- to use a modern term, they tried to 'co-opt' Christianity.) While modern theologians give the unusual contents at Nag Hammadi much more attention than they deserve, a prayer introduction in *The Gospel Of the Egyptians* is a true attention-grabber. It reads roughly (very roughly) like this :

I?ieus ? ou ? ?a! O Jesus, bond of Yah's righteousness, O Living Water, O Child of Child, O glorious Name! Really truly, O Eon that is, iiii ?? eeee oo uuuu ?? aaaaa, really truly ? aaaa ? ?! O One That Is, Seer Of the Ages! Really truly, aee ??iiii uuuuuu ????, You who are eternally eternal, really truly i? ai? in the heart, You who Are, You are what You are, ei o ei eios ei!

Even the translatable words are very iffy and full of vowels and mixed languages. Like modern glossolalia, it's got a lot of almost-words, divine titles, and 'really truly'. It's almost like a parody, it's so garbled, but it was serious in its intent. The ecstatic speech did not make the book's bizarre beliefs the slightest bit more true.

glossolalia

Glossolalia is fabricated, meaningless speech.

According to Dr. William T. Samarin, professor of anthropology and linguistics at the University of Toronto, 

glossolalia consists of strings of meaningless syllables made up of sounds taken from those familiar to the speaker and put together more or less haphazardly .... Glossolalia is language-like because the speaker unconsciously wants it to be language-like. Yet in spite of superficial similarities, glossolalia fundamentally is not language (Nickell, 108).

When spoken by schizophrenics, glossolalia are recognized as gibberish. In charismatic Christian communities glossolalia is sacred and referred to as "speaking in tongues" or having "the gift of tongues." In Acts of the Apostles, tongues of fire are described as alighting on the Apostles, filling them with the Holy Spirit. Allegedly, this allowed the Apostles to speak in their own language but be understood by foreigners from several nations. Glossolalics, on the other hand, speak in a foreign language and are understood by nobody.

Glossolalics behave in various ways, depending upon the social expectations of their community. Some go into convulsions or lose consciousness; others are less dramatic. Some seem to go into a trance; some claim to have amnesia of their speaking in tongues. All believe they are possessed by the Holy Spirit and the gibberish they utter is meaningful. However, only one with faith and the gift of interpretation is capable of figuring out the meaning of the meaningless utterances. Of course, this belief gives the interpreter unchecked leeway in "translating" the meaningless utterances. Nicholas Spanos notes: "Typically, the interpretation supports the central tenets of the religious community" (Spanos, 147).

Uttering gibberish that is interpreted as profound mystical insight by holy men is an ancient practice. In Greece, even the priest of Apollo, god of light, engaged in prophetic babbling. The ancient Israelites did it. So did the Jansenists, the Quakers, the Methodists, and the Shakers.

---

Encyclopedia Britannica, 1972 Edition, Vol. 22, p. 75 -Tongue-speaking manifested itself early in the Christian experience. At Pentecost (Acts 2) the gift appeared as a sign of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which marked the character of the earliest Christians...During later church history, glossolalia (speaking in tongues) occurred among the mendicant friars of the 13th century, little prophets of Cevennes, the Jansenists, and the Irvingites. Tongues were found also among the early Quakers, as well as among the converts of John Wesley and George Whitefield... In modern times glossolalia has been found chiefly among Holiness and Pentecostal groups. The Saturday Evening Post, May 16, 1964, p.32 - Praying in tongues has recurred at intervals throughout the Christian era, although it did not affect large masses until early in this century.

---

If speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of being filled with God's Spirit, then why didn't Charles Haddon Spurgeon, London's greatest preacher, ever speak in tongues?  Why didn't the legendary Dwight L. Moody speak in Tongues?  Why didn't Evangelist John R. Rice, Pastor Jack Hyles, or Dr. Lee Roberson ever speak in Tongues?  Why didn't the mighty preacher George Whitefield speak in tongues?  Why didn't Pastor F.B. Meyer's speak in tongues?  Why didn't the powerful evangelist Billy Sunday ever speak in tongues?  Don't you see what a bunch of liars and false prophets the Charismatics are?  The true Biblical evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit is a desire to go soulwinning ... John 15:5 states, "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing."  Any carnal fool can utter some jibber-jabber out of his mouth (what the Pentecostals call "tongues").  The desire to win lost sinners to Jesus Christ is the strongest evidence that someone is filled with God's Spirit.  Why do Charismatics focus solely upon the tongues at Pentecost?  The big story folks was that at least 3,000 lost sinners were saved that day!!! 

Photo to Left: False prophet Benny Hinn doing his hocus-pocus act.

Carefully notice that no one in the Old Testament spoke in tongues.  In Acts chapter 9 we read of Saul's conversion (later to be called, Paul, the Apostle).  There is no mention of him speaking in tongues as an initial evidence of salvation.  A Samaritan woman (the woman at the well) was saved in John chapter 4; but we don't see any Biblical record of her speaking in tongues.  There is no record of Jesus speaking in tongues.  Paul never mentioned speaking in tongues in his epistles to the churches, except to the carnal church of Corinth.  The Apostle John wrote 1st John so we could KNOW we are saved (1st John 5:13); yet he never mentions speaking in tongues.  The book of Revelation never mentions speaking in tongues.  Clearly, Pentecostals have created a false religion.

"Tongues" simply means "Languages" in the Bible

It is extremely important for the Bible student to look up the word "tongues" in the Greek.  As you will find, "glossa" simply means "languages."  When the Bible speaks of "tongues," it ALWAYS is referring to a KNOWN, earthy, established language--never some mysterious, unknown, hocus-pocus, mumbo-jumbo.  The tongues which the Revivalists et al. practice is NOT found anywhere in the Word of God. Even the carnal Church of Corinth wasn't foolish enough to speak in some crazy language that even the speaker didn't understand.  This is clearly evidenced by Paul's constant mention of the necessity of an interpreter. No one could interpret the garbage which Charismatics are babbling even if they tried.  They admit that they don't even know what they're saying.  How insane!  For an excellent understanding of the subject of tongues, please read Face to Face With Tongues (by Pastor Max D. Younce, Th.D.)

Every Revivalist needs to take a careful look at Acts 9:17-20, because it puts them all to shame...

Tongues - an Unsound Evidence of Salvation

"as we were going to the place of prayer, we met a slave girl who had a spirit of divination ... Paul, very much annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, 'I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.'" (Acts 16:16-18)

Acts 16 is a deep Scipture - deceptively simple, but one of those scriptures we come across from time to time that is bursting with meaning beneath the surface. Paul was much annoyed with this girl who had a 'spirit of divination'. Let's look at those words. In Greek, she had a pneu'ma py'tho?a, or literally, "a spirit of python". The NRSV Harper-Collins Study Bible notes of Acts 16:

"Spirit of divination, lit. 'a spirit of the Python,' which was associated with the Delphic oracle."

The Python was a mythical beast which guarded the Oracle of Delphi, near Corinth. At the Oracle of Delphi, travellers would congregate to hear a prophecy of the future for themselves or their country. According to some historians, the Pythoness (priestess) would cry out in unintelligible sounds which were interpreted by another person to form ambiguous verses. To have a spirit of the Python would be to be like the Pythoness - it would be someone who was filled with the demonic spirit of the oracle... someone who would prophecy by crying out in unintelligible sounds!

And as such, there is scriptural evidence in Acts 16 for false tongues. That is not to say that all tongues are wrong. While Paul excorcised this slave girl in Acts from the spirit of the Python, he himself spoke in tongues, and was glad of the experience (1.Cor.14:18). What does it tell us? It tells us clearly that there can be false tongues in the world! As Paul also wrote:

"The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved" (2 Thess 2: 9-10).

What have we learned from the experience of the slave girl? When someone 'speaks in tongues' we cannot be sure that they have salvation, becuase tongues is not a solely Christian phenomenon. According to Professor Maja-Lisa Swartz of the Helsinki University, after her research of the Tanzanian tribes people, "speaking in tongues is nothing specific for the Christian religion. It appears in all religions and is no guarantee for what type of spirit it is that the speaker is speaking for".

For example, John MacArthur writes, in Charismatic Chaos, "Ecstatic speech is a part of many pagan religions in Africa, East Africa. Tonga people of Africa, when a demon is exorcised, sing in Zulu even though they say they don't know the Zulu language. Ecstatic speech is found today among Muslims, Eskimos, Tibetan monks. It is involved in parapsychological occult groups. Did you know that the Mormons, even Joseph Smith himself advocates speaking in tongues? It could be demonic." An Encyclop?ia of Occultism says, "Speaking and writing in foreign tongues, or in unintelligible outpourings mistaken for such, is a very old form of psychic phenomenon."

Tongues are, therefore, an unsound evidence of salvation. They can be demonic! Do you say that someone is 'saved' when they speak in tongues? It is a poor test, if even pagans speak in tongues. Are the Tonga people saved when they speak in tongues? Are the Voodoo people, or the Buhhdist monks saved when they speak in tongues?

Tongues is clearly not God's evidence of salvation. And yet, someone can know whether they are saved or not. In 1John 5:13, it is written:

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

How do you know you have eternal life? John doesn't mention tongues. If tongues were the sign that someone was saved, he would have metioned it there. But instead he says about those who know they have eternal life "you who believe in the name of the Son of God"! Recall the comments about testing the Spirits, "test the spirits to see whether they are from God: for many false prophets have gone out into the world ... every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God" (1John 4:1-3). So how do you know you have the right Spirit and eternal life? The answer turns on whether you can "confess Jesus". It is here that the Tonga people, Voodoos, and Buhhdist priests fail.

Perhaps you speak in tongues, and have always thought it was clear evidence of your salvation. Yet, you see now that tongues cannot prove anything. You can confess Christ right now, as you read this, and accept the real evidence of salvation in your life. Paul writes,

If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (Romans 10:9).

You may also want to make this prayer:

Jesus, I don't want to put all my trust in tongues any more - I want to put my trust in you. I realise that tongues are not the evidence of my salvation - my salvation is in you, and in you alone. I believe now that you died, were buried, and on the third day rose again. On that gospel alone I put my trust. Help me to reject the false teachers who show me a gospel different to that one you gave. On this day, I confess you Jesus as Lord.

 

?1997, All rights reserved. Please copy and distribute information on this page freely, but don't alter or sell it without my permission. Unless otherwise indicated, the Scripture quotations contained herein are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, Copyright 1989, by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.

---

Reply to : BrolgaYour article well executedMoth, for my own interest, where did you find the sourceof information,particularly for above topic? thanks BrolgaThe writing is stuff I'm dragging back to the nest for anyone who's interested. I've paraphrased here and there and haven't consistantly given the original authors their due creditation. you can google various phrases to source them out. Here's a site that has some articles about Revival doctrine:Click for other writing from the Revival

---

http://www.spiritualabuse.org/upchistory.html

I know it's been a while but here's something I came across re UPC.

At moment I'm having a look at the Azuza st Revival & Welsh Revivals makes for interesting reading.

Must admit my ignorance on such subjects as oneness movements & Jesus only movements.

Why did these groups feel the need to split back in 1955, it seems that is where many of the troubles seem to begin , when you separate Jesus & Tongues.