The Early Church on Speaking In Tongues

[the68]

I've been reading quite a bit about the topic of Charismatic ecstatic utterances/private prayer languages from a historical standpoint. I personally do not hold firmly to a cessationist viewpoint, but it is my understanding that if the gift does still operate it must do so within its Biblical context; through known human languages. It seems to me that, excepting the Montanists and later the Irvingites, it was a generally accepted and understood for almost 1900 years that known human languages were spoken by the Apostles on the day of Pentecost and following. I wish I could find my study notes that led me to this conclusion, but it seems to me that Origen, Epiphanius, Iraneus, Tertullian, and Cyril of Alexandria all held to this understanding.

For what it's worth, here is some documentation I've found rather fascinating.

http://charlesasullivan.com/4512/cyril-of-alexandria-on-tongues-i-corinthians/

This fellow has done quite a bit of extensive research on the topic of early history and seems well-read. The information he has accumulated on his website is incredible.

He also forwarded me some interesting information by Gary McGee (a Pentecostal researcher) that appeared to tie personal prayer/heavenly languages to the late 1800's missions crisis, but they are in PDF form and I am unable to share them here (anyone who is interested may PM me their email address and I will send them to you).

Curious as to everyone's thoughts concerning the early church's understanding of this topic. Please stay OT. I'm aware that ecstatic utterances is a rather volatile subject, so if your argument doesn't have something to do with the early church's understanding of Pentecost/languages I respectfully ask that you refrain from posting. Thanks!

 

[plain_n_simple]

I pray in tongues. It's amazing. The early church did it in prayer as well as the other uses. Personal prayer is more important imo.

 

[righteousdude2]

Oh, oh?

I pray in tongues. It's amazing. The early church did it in prayer as well as the other uses. Personal prayer is more important imo.

P_n_S - I will be here, right beside when the onslaught falls in your direction! I was bloodied just last month for admitting I had a prayer language, so expect the :tonofbricks: and know that there are other Baptists, who should use this very moment in time to come out of the spiritual closet and stand up for what they believe in and practice.

I am not ashamed of this gift. And once again, I am going to say this, BECAUSE it is how I believe, tongues is NOT for everyone, and surely it is not, and I mean NOT, a sign of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost! :thumbsup:

Like you say, it is "Amazing" as well as "Important" to you! The thing is, I think OTHERS feel the same, and if you are ever going to admit, now is the time. Do not be afraid of criticism. They may judge us, but the proof of our agape love is not in judging them for not believing in or wanting we claim and hold dear to our hearts.

Personally, I am proud of your willingness to stand up and tell others what I have told them. And like me, I am sure you don't care on iota if others accept it, or have it, because it is not for everyone! Just like other gifts, this is a gift that not everyone has to have. All that really matters is that we are saved and going to heaven.

Welcome to the coming war ... and unless I am wrong, you will be confronted, and I will stand with you ...AND THAT THOSE WHO ASO SHARE OUR GIFT FINALLY SAYS SO!!! :wavey:

 

[righteousdude2]

Welcome!

I'm aware that ecstatic utterances is a rather volatile subject, so if your argument doesn't have something to do with the early church's understanding of Pentecost/languages I respectfully ask that you refrain from posting. Thanks!

May I welcome you ... and pray that you remain open minded, because regardless of your last sentence ... you are going to feel the heat of those volatile Baptists, just as surely as the ground felt the blast of a Saturn Rocket leaving the Cape!!!:smilewinkgrin:

BTW - do you speak in tongues?

 

[plain_n_simple]

I believe there are 4 distinct applications for tongues. 3 are to who the Spirit wills, and are public. 1 is for every believer who wants to pray in the Spirit, can. That's the gift part. To me it is essential to a relationship with Jesus. As I willingly audibly produce sounds the Spirit forms the words as I pray. I have no idea what they mean but He does. The effects of praying like this in my closet are amazing when I go out into the world. You must know the awesome edification He works in you and your ministry. I see now where some of your strength comes from Amen!

 

[righteousdude2]

You are spot on!

I believe there are 4 distinct applications for tongues. 3 are to who the Spirit wills, and are public. 1 is for every believer who wants to pray in the Spirit, can. That's the gift part. To me it is essential to a relationship with Jesus. As I willingly audibly produce sounds the Spirit forms the words as I pray. I have no idea what they mean but He does. The effects of praying like this in my closet are amazing when I go out into the world. You must know the awesome edification He works in you and your ministry. I see now where some of your strength comes from Amen!

That is what I beieve! Great point! You have a clear understanding of this, I only wish others wouldn't judge us! I know we don't judge them!

 

[the68]

I appreciate each of your responses, though I disagree with them from a Biblical standpoint. However, there are numerous threads concerning the arguments each of you have posted here on BaptistBoard. I am not looking to start an argument on these points you mentioned. I respectfully asked that responses concern only what the early church fathers and sources from early history believed concerning ecstatic utterance and speaking in tongues as a means to quell such a repeat of past disputes. I would think that men and women of integrity would respect such a request. I'm not looking for only cessationist sources, mind you. If you have extra-Biblical information from early church history (pre-1906) that supports ecstatic utterance as accepted by the Charismatic doctrine then by all means post it. Other arguments are off topic. There are and have been other threads for such debate.

 

[plain_n_simple]

The Stone-Campbell revival (1850's) Kentucky, reports of Holy Spirit utterings and groanings among other supernatural manifestations. This revival of some 20,000 people ended up becoming Church of Christ and several other offshoots. Books are rare and stories of first hand accounts are as well.

 

[Revmitchell]

1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, ....

 

[the68]

1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, ....

Revmitchell, I understand this. However, you are the third individual to respond to this thread in a way inconsistent with its original topic. I've read a hundred of your posts here on this forum concerning this topic and though I identify more with your position, here you are being rather disrespectful by trying to continue this thread in a direction I have repeatedly stated I do not intend for it to go.

The Stone-Campbell revival (1850's) Kentucky, reports of Holy Spirit utterings and groanings among other supernatural manifestations. This revival of some 20,000 people ended up becoming Church of Christ and several other offshoots. Books are rare and stories of first hand accounts are as well.

This is exactly the type of information I am looking for, thank you plain_n_simple.

 

[Revmitchell]

Revmitchell, I understand this. However, you are the third individual to respond to this thread in a way inconsistent with its original topic. I've read a hundred of your posts here on this forum concerning this topic and though I identify more with your position, here you are being rather disrespectful by trying to continue this thread in a direction I have repeatedly stated I do not intend for it to go.



This is exactly the type of information I am looking for, thank you plain_n_simple.

Actually if you are looking for views from the early church the 1850's aint it. And whatever went on in the 1850's as posted in this thread it was not biblical tongues.


And I have not posted 100's of posts on this topic here or anywhere else.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

This fellow has done quite a bit of extensive research on the topic of early history and seems well-read.

Well read perhaps, but his research is slanted, geared to prove his unbiblical view of tongues despite the biblical evidence that the gift has ceased, and that the "tongues" practiced today are so far from anything biblical as to be suspect as inspired by a spiritual force of a much different nature than God. Sullivan is notorious for using bad or deliberately misleading interpretations of the biblical accounts, and twisting the meaning of extra-biblical writings in defending his incorrect doctrine.

The information he has accumulated on his website is incredible.

Yes, he's a prolific writer for an erroneous and false teaching.

He also forwarded me some interesting information by Gary McGee (a Pentecostal researcher) that appeared to tie personal prayer/heavenly languages to the late 1800's missions crisis, but they are in PDF form and I am unable to share them here (anyone who is interested may PM me their email address and I will send them to you).

McGee is of the same ilk, and another "researcher" who sets out with a premise and an intent to prove it, whether he has to stick to the truth or not.

Curious as to everyone's thoughts concerning the early church's understanding of this topic.

Well, you've obviously got mine.

Please stay OT. I'm aware that ecstatic utterances is a rather volatile subject, so if your argument doesn't have something to do with the early church's understanding of Pentecost/languages I respectfully ask that you refrain from posting. Thanks!

As Rev said, touching on the 1850s violates your own OP regarding an "early church" view of tongues.

Now, feel free to criticize me, as I suspect your "research" was really non-existent, and your purpose here is to open a discussion that will undoubtedly deteriorate into a riot when you discover few will support your views.

 

[Revmitchell]

Now, feel free to criticize me, as I suspect your "research" was really non-existent, and your purpose here is to open a discussion that will undoubtedly deteriorate into a riot when you discover few will support your views.[/FONT][/SIZE]

I have taken part on a couple of charismatic forums in the past. What I have found is they do not like opposing views. I suspect that is the concern of the op writer here as well.

 

[plain_n_simple]

the68:If you have extra-Biblical information from early church history (pre-1906) that supports ecstatic utterance as accepted by the Charismatic doctrine then by all means post it.

I believe George Fox experienced healings and tongues was mentioned but I cannot recall the article. Around 1650 England

 

[plain_n_simple]

Smith Wigglesworth late 1800's but a lady from Ohio did 3 examples regularly from 1882 on, Mariah Woodworth Etter 1844-1924. It is difficult to find earlier examples because writing was just not common until the past 200 or so years.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

the68:If you have extra-Biblical information from early church history (pre-1906) that supports ecstatic utterance as accepted by the Charismatic doctrine then by all means post it.

I believe George Fox experienced healings and tongues was mentioned but I cannot recall the article. Around 1650 England

Thread Title: "The Early Church on Speaking in Tongues"

By what standard is "pre-1906" "early church"? The accepted definition of the Early Church is the first one to three centuries after Christ. Fox, the charismatic movement, the pentecostal movement -- all that is far past the time frame defined by the thread title, and the OP violates his own guidelines. That is because from the true Early Church, there are virtually no writings relative to tongues. Irenaeus wrote of very isolated tongues practices (ironically, mostly around the original church of Corinth), and Tertullian spoke of what he called "a questionable practice" he had come across of tongues with interpretation. Other than that, the gift is only mentioned in the past tense in reference to Paul's writings. There is no more proof positive that the gift had ceased in the first century.

This thread is nothing more than an effort to promote a false teaching.

 

[Revmitchell]

This thread is nothing more than an effort to promote a false teaching.

And without any opposing views as charismatics so often do.

 

[plain_n_simple]

the68 in restating said pre1906(scroll back), and is looking for reference material, not debate.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

the68 in restating said pre1906(scroll back), and is looking for reference material, not debate.

1) Of course he wants no debate. He doesn't want his false belief challenged.

2) You still haven't told me how he --or you, for that matter -- can reconcile "pre-1906" with "early church."

 

[Revmitchell]

the68 in restating said pre1906(scroll back), and is looking for reference material, not debate.

Then it was posted in the wrong forum.