Speaking in tongues Real, or BS?

a reply to: network dude

I find the most value in speaking in tongues comes from not praying about what I want or need; it is about me praying in the Spirit for those things that God knows need prayer!

Is this the same Houston church?

whnt.com...

a reply to: network dude

I know some Catholics who refer to Pentecostal's as "Holy Rollers." In reference to rolling down the isles, swaying their hands and talking in tongues, lol. As far as talking in tongues, **#//$@@%%%///***...Fake, Fake, Fake. Just a gullible, ridiculous, do as I do, religious ritual.

a reply to: network dude

100% nonsense, just like televangelist healers and those wingnuts who dance with rattlesnakes. I don't doubt that some of them really think they're speaking in "god's" prayer language, but that said, mental illness can manifest itself in mysterious ways.

Speaking in tongues today is demonically inspired. Scripture (1 Corinthians 13) indicates that it would be done away with after the first century.

In fact everyone in the 1st Cen. who had gifts, such as to prophecy, heal, speak in tongues, etc. had hands laid upon them by 1 of the 12 apostles, or Paul and they are all now dead.

Yes, speaking in tongues happens today, but it is demonically inspired. Everyone today that speaks in tongues can be assured they have been possessed by Satan.

You can see some really repugnant examples of this on YouTube.

So, what say you all? When we institute that theocratic gov't that the far christian right (cruz included) will it include speaking in tongues? Shall we ban it? or enforce it?

I have have nothing against the op for asking this question, they seem to be sincerely seeking knowledge. So, I will tell him what I believe concerning the topic. I believe that yes, one can speak in tongues, our languages on earth are really quite limited and I kind of think that the speaking in tongues are a way of expressing something that language just isn't suited to express. or maybe our mind isn't able to grasp. I also believe that in many pentecostal churches there is quite a bit that goes on that is faked, that is there just for show. I left the pentecostal church many years ago, but I do still pray occasionally and sometimes I pray in tongues. The last time I did was when my husband passed on.. I didn't intend to speak in tongues, I really try to avoid it at this point, but well, it was like my spirit just cried it out.

My gripe is that the actual article is a political hit piece really, because well, for some reason the christian right has made one personal religious beliefs a most important topic to be discussed when it concerns anyone running for office. Kennedy was catholic and at the time many were concerned that his alliegence would be to the catholic church instead of the US. It was one of the bigger obstacles he had to overcome. I am just pointing out, if one can be so intent to be discriminatory when it comes to politics that you just have to know weather the person you are voting for is truly a christian or not, well then the next step in the process is just what flavor of christian are they? And, this in no way stays true to the spirit of the constitution, does it? Religion is a personal thing, and I really don't believe that any two people beliefs are exactly alike. They shouldn't be, since we are all individuals with different backgrounds, living different experiences. Maybe it's just time to practice some of that Faith that is the primary ingredient in any relgion and trust that the beliefs that other people have taken on at any one point in their lives are there because it's suits them, it serves them the best and quite worrying about them.

a reply to: dawnstar

The article just prompted me to officially ask this. My experiences happened many years ago.
And to me, it seems fake and almost makes me think that if God was having a bad day, these folks might push him over the edge and really get him pissed. I enjoy the happy, loving God, so I try not to make him angry.

But as I said, it's not my place to tell others what to believe or think, that's between them and God.

a reply to: dawnstar

Not really, it's just that Christians feel burned by the current occupant of the Oval Office. We don't need someone who specifically caters to us, but we would like someone who doesn't openly blame us for everything too.

We bend over backward to respect Muslims. Fine, but at the same time, no respect is given for those who are equally sincere in their Christian faith. We are reminded of the Crusades or called bitter clingers or something else.

We would like a president who respects us and our beliefs at least as much as Obama seems to respect Muslims.

I have personally witnessed speaking in tongues several times.

One of the participants was a close, childhood friend of mine. She didn't know any language but English, yet was fluent, for a short time, in a strange language.

Sounded like Hebrew to me. She admitted later to me she had no idea what she was saying, it just flowed out.

100% real to me.

My question would be: Why would any Christian want to involve themselves in the politics of Satan's world? The Bible tells us that Satan is the ruler of the world, does it not? Did not Jesus also say that his kingdom is no part of this world and that his servants are also no part of the world?

So if Satan is the ruler, and religious leaders are running for political office, and have political influence, does that not make them also a part of Satan's wicked system of things?

So if a person is speaking in tongues for a political figure, would it not stand to reason that it is Satan? Why would Jesus be involved with that?

In fact aren't all people who profess to be Christians that involve themselves with the political element of Satan's world, are they not constituting themselves a part of Satan's world and against Jesus' established kingdom in heaven?

They pray for "God's kingdom to come" and then turn their back on it and support a failed and corrupt system in Satan's control.

If real, Im sure there is a scientifical explanation for it. We just dont know enough about the mind and the nature of a human being yet.

It seems absurd that the christian god would send his holy spirit to manifest in a burst of foreign jibberish.

originally posted by: blueman12
If real, Im sure there is a scientifical explanation for it. We just dont know enough about the mind and the nature of a human being yet.

It seems absurd that the christian god would send his holy spirit to manifest in a burst of foreign jibberish.

It is demonic. And you are quite correct, it is highly absurd!

It should not surprise us though. For Satan can appear to the foolish as an angel of light. And can give power to his followers that mimic the holy spirit.

The fact that God's word clearly states that the "gifts of spirit" would end in the first century is proof enough that all spirit manifestations of speaking in tongues is from Satan the Devil.

Those Churches where people get "filled with the holy ghost" and start laughing hysterically, babbling nonsense, shaking uncontrollably, and speaking in tongues, those churches are filled with darkness and Satan.

Why would anyone want to subject themselves to such evil? It boggles my mind.

If you could actually hear what some of those people were saying in their tongues, you would be shamed. Their speech is degrading, filthy, shameful. They uplift and brag about Satan and blaspheme Jehovah God and Jesus during their "speaking in tongues" and a lot of times, just say stupid gibberish things.

But none of it is clean, and none of it is Christian or from God.

a reply to: network dude

Every time «Pentecostal» «tongues» have been examined by linguistic experts the conclusion is it's gibberish. Mumbo jumbo. Not real. Some times they would come across single words, but no signs of syntax or any structure other than some repeating rythms others repeating words they've learned in Hebrew or Greek, often oddly or incorrectly rendered or voiced.

All studies I have heard of relating to «Pentecostal Tongues» (i.e. the phenomenon of certain Christians waving their hands in the air babbling away random or favorite syllables)-- have shown that they are making exactly NO sense other than the notion that the whole phenomenon IS nonsense.

There are however quite a few examples of people suddenly expressing themselves in languages they can't possibly have learned which I find truly amazing. On the other hand: The Catholic Church's own exorcism manual lists speaking intelligibly ex. in Latin or biblical languages, without there being any rational reason-- i.e. truly «speaking in tongues» the way it is described in the NT which would be to all of a sudden being able to speaking and/or understanding languages you haven't learned-- as true signs of diabolic demon possession.

S & F for bringing it up. The phenomenon is odd indeed.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

however, I find that the idea of kundalini is too impersonal to be associated with the living presence of God.

Interesting, since Kundalini is your own personal spirit(depending on who you talk to).

Depersonalisation is an Eastern aim, in terms of spirituality. In the western traditions, mainly in Christianity but also in occult traditions, personal sovereignty is acknowledged & valued.

Even more interesting, since Christianity is all about "depersonalization". "More of god, less of me. Thy will, not mine be done. Being an empty vessel for his service. We are alive in Christ, because we also died in him." and so on.

Being suffused & overwhelmed with the presence of God, through some form of devotional contemplation, seems very different to killing the ego, allowing some impersonal force (kundalini) to take over you, and embracing the void....

Being suffused and overwhelmed? Sounds just like kundalini, and sounds just as "impersonal" and "depersonalized". Isn't that what being a Christian is all about? Dying to self? Just because it doesn't have the name Jesus attached doesn't make it wrong or impersonal.

Well, I can see what you're getting at with your attempted shredding of my words, but from what I know, you personally have a bias in this matter & can't discuss churchy stuff without a bee under your bonnet. As a result, I believe I can state plainly that your opinion is negatively biased, and you're therefore expected to be looking for opportunities to make false assertions, by specifically trying to undermine & twist the words of those who make statements which might go against your personal bias.

I can see that in a sense, you have something approaching a valid point about the 'less of me, more of thee' stuff, but it's not, in actuality, a valid point at all - not when the details are properly analysed. It is understandable that someone with no experience of the Christian faith might draw the conclusion you present - but for you, there's not really much of an excuse for the misrepresentation you chose to make. Becoming less in the presence of God is not something in which one has a choice. If you come face to face with the Lord, if you are found in His presence, you can't help but notice the 'smallness' which characterises our existence as human beings. This doesn't in any way amount to 'depersonalisation' as I was using the term to refer to meditative practice in the East - and I think you know that, in your heart of hearts. It's not the same thing at all.

Eastern mystics depersonalise to the extent that they are seeking to be an expression of the void, of emptiness & dissociation, 'free from the illusion of self'. That's nothing at all like what can be expected from a walk of faith on the true Christian path. We do not give up our sovereignty as human beings, we do not give up our personality, and God doesn't ask us to, not at all - we only lay our small self before God, asking Him to work in us what needs to be done to draw us nearer to the state of perfection which is ultimately our goal - though practically unachievable on Earth, to all but the few. Meditation, contemplation, prayer (through various means, including tongues if the circumstances are appropriate), fellowship & charity - such things are to be encountered & practiced by the Christian devotee, and to walk the path properly takes a measure of discipline equal to that practiced by the Eastern mystics, in their comparatively hollow pursuit of emptiness.

Hope that clears things up a bit. No personal offence intended, incidentally - I'm just aware of some elements of your past involvement with the Christian faith, and I know you dropped out with some measure of bitterness, for reasons I do not know, and do not ask of. I hope that you find peace in whatever way you can, and would suggest that perhaps you don't look for opportunities to serve a smackdown when people discuss church. It's not all bad - far from it. The bad is known to be among us - wolves amidst the sheep - and in that knowledge, we seek to live a truly generative & communicative expression of the faith, to show that even while some people get it very, very wrong - there are many who really, really try to get it right.

the main-stream-religions idea of 'Speaking-in-tongues' is just a kind of latch on model to accept the very long-ago and mythic idea where the = Language of the Birds/Green Language : en.wikipedia.org...
was a benefit 'given' to inspired persons who sought to become closer to their Pantheon of Dieties

...In mythology, medieval literature and occultism, the language of the birds is postulated as a mystical, perfect divine language, green language, adamic language, Enochian, angelic language or a mythical or magical language used by birds to communicate with the initiated. ...

Speaking Tongues (as an willful person) ~ (AKA: Gosalia) was an accepted and cherished part of Pagan or Mother-Earth/Goddess superstition or ideology... prior to the 2 thousand year-old organized 'common core' religious thought which controls many in today's world...So the early Church Cult of Christians adopted the practice as acceptable so as to accommodate the masses of converts...

speaking in this Devine Language was equated as a 'Baptism in the Power of the Holy Spirit" so that the mumbo-jumbo would be acceptable to the Sheep/Flock/Fish (the congregation of believers)


go on a you tube tour and you will find many a video (10 minutes or less) on how You Too can gain the Power of Baptism-by-the-Holy-Spirit by allowing the 'Speaking-in-Tongues' event become an everyday form of prayer for yourself


BS or a mild form of possession ? a real & secret Language which will always be undecipherable to nonbelievers?

I won't stake my head on that...but I experienced Kundalini Fire several times in my life which is not looked on as a true spiritual experience in the organized western religious world

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

As a result, I believe I can state plainly that your opinion is negatively biased, and you're therefore expected to be looking for opportunities to make false assertions, by specifically trying to undermine & twist the words of those who make statements which might go against your personal bias.

Nothing any "good Christian" wouldn't do, I assure you.

My post was meant to illustrate a point. Namely, that you know less about what you were addressing than than the member you were responding to knows about Christianity. Therefore, your response to said member was stated in ignorance and complete lack of understanding, due to your own personal negative bias against anything that doesn't have a Jesus sticker slapped on it(respectfully).
Yes, I do know Christian doctrine and theology. I can also stay within that framework and explain things to you that most Christians will never have the ambition to learn and understand about their own faith, and the guidebook they follow, BUT...I am no longer stuck within that framework. What you(and others) call misrepresenting, shredding, false assertions, undermining, and twisting of yours, or the bible words, I call stepping out of that narrow world view, and looking at those same ambiguous verses, chapters, and books without the fear induced constraint of Christian doctrine/theology. I can look at those same scriptures I used to look at one way, and see the implications and connections to metaphysical and philosophical concepts from a whole new perspective, because I'm not double bound by it any longer.

I can see that in a sense, you have something approaching a valid point about the 'less of me, more of thee' stuff, but it's not, in actuality, a valid point at all - not when the details are properly analysed. It is understandable that someone with no experience of the Christian faith might draw the conclusion you present - but for you, there's not really much of an excuse for the misrepresentation you chose to make.

Actually, it IS a valid point. Look at your next statement in bold...It's also understandable that a Christian with no real experience or understanding of metaphysical concepts might draw the erroneous conclusions you have. One can read the bible, or about the bible, and still lack understanding of what is in there. In the same way, reading about the metaphysical concepts you are referring to is great, but it doesn't mean you understand them any better than someone understands the bible just because they read it through once ot twice. Don't make the same error you're accusing someone else of.

Eastern mystics depersonalise to the extent that they are seeking to be an expression of the void, of emptiness & dissociation, 'free from the illusion of self'.

This is what I'm talking about. Lets re-read that with some understanding...
Jeremiah 17
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
Psalm 139
Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts
Those two verses are the biblical perspective of what you were just talking about. I could list several more, but the point is, you have read, but you lack understanding of what you're reading. The idea of expressing the "void" and the "illusion of self" are similar to Christianity's concept of the inability to truly understand our own failings and faults without the illumination of god/holy spirit. To express the void, is roughly similar to "more of thee, less of me". There is no more or less depersonalizing than with Christianity. Sovereignty is intact, and no one is turning themselves over to an impersonal force any more than Christianity does.

Hope that clears things up a bit. No personal offence intended

Same here.

incidentally - I'm just aware of some elements of your past involvement with the Christian faith, and I know you dropped out with some measure of bitterness, for reasons I do not know, and do not ask of.

Then your awareness lacks a complete picture. Yes, I saw and experienced things in the church as a Christian, and as a deacon/elder I wished at the time I had never seen nor known. Despicable doesn't do it justice, and when I left the church, I wasn't happy, but I did not blame "god" for what men and women do. When I left Christianity, it was because it all finally made sense. It had nothing to do with how I felt about what I had seen. Those things made sense too, once I saw it all for what it really is. Thank you. I am at peace.

and would suggest that perhaps you don't look for opportunities to serve a smackdown when people discuss church.

Believe it or not, sometimes I post from your side of the fence. It depends on the topic.
I know from experience Christians have a tendency to see themselves as having all the answers the world needs, and anything outside of Christianity is of the devil, and bound for eternal damnation. I've seen many more condescending "smackdowns" from Christians in my life, than I have ever seen from those outside of it.

Sorry so lengthy. There was a lot there to reply to.

a reply to: Klassified

Eastern mystics depersonalise to the extent that they are seeking to be an expression of the void, of emptiness & dissociation, 'free from the illusion of self'.

This is what I'm talking about. Lets re-read that with some understanding...
Jeremiah 17
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
Psalm 139
Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts
Those two verses are the biblical perspective of what you were just talking about. I could list several more, but the point is, you have read, but you lack understanding of what you're reading. The idea of expressing the "void" and the "illusion of self" are similar to Christianity's concept of the inability to truly understand our own failings and faults without the illumination of god/holy spirit. To express the void, is roughly similar to "more of thee, less of me". There is no more or less depersonalizing than with Christianity. Sovereignty is intact, and no one is turning themselves over to an impersonal force any more than Christianity does.

I feel like I need to expound on this a little more before it gets blown out of proportion, and taken out of context...
The difference between the Christian and the mystic in my simplified example is that the mystic does not see themselves as wicked, or needing absolution because they are rotten to the core. However, the twain meet in what they are seeking. Enlightenment. Christians from god(still small voice), and the mystic from "the void", which is not a deity, it is a reflection. Hence, "Know thyself." The Kingdom of god is within you, and so is the void.

a reply to: Klassified

I saw and experienced things in the church as a Christian, and as a deacon/elder I wished at the time I had never seen nor known. Despicable doesn't do it justice, and when I left the church, I wasn't happy, but I did not blame god for what men and women do. When I left Christianity, it was because it all finally made sense. It had nothing to do with how I felt about what I had seen. Those things made sense too, once I saw it all for what it really is. Thank you. I am at peace.

Bravo, Klassified. Always keepin' it classy......

a reply to: St Udio
All accurate except:

GLOSSOLALIA

glos·so·la·li·a
ˌɡläsəˈlālēə,ˌɡlô-/
noun
the phenomenon of (apparently) speaking in an unknown language, especially in religious worship. It is practiced especially by Pentecostal and charismatic Christians.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: St Udio
All accurate except:

GLOSSOLALIA

glos·so·la·li·a
ˌɡläsəˈlālēə,ˌɡlô-/
noun
the phenomenon of (apparently) speaking in an unknown language, especially in religious worship. It is practiced especially by Pentecostal and charismatic Christians.

I humbly accept that...
funny, I searched glosalia and got the 'gosalia' list... so I went with that spelling.... my spell check is always some minutes late

thanks for informing the readers, now they can research more in depth ...