...Under Demonic influence...since the psychologist might have been ignorant of the spirits.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Early Church on Speaking In Tongues
- Thread starter the68
- Start date
...Under Demonic influence...since the psychologist might have been ignorant of the spirits.
...Under Demonic influence...since the psychologist might have been ignorant of the spirits.
Ooooooorrrr! It is a made up and ungodly attempt to heighten ones own emotions based purely on experience that can be concocted from within ones self. This is what I call pure emotionalism. Personal experience and emotion takes the place of true worship. It is idolatry. Worshiping experience and emotion.
Ooooooorrrr! It is a made up and ungodly attempt to heighten ones own emotions based purely on experience that can be concocted from within ones self. This is what I call pure emotionalism. Personal experience and emotion takes the place of true worship. It is idolatry. Worshiping experience and emotion.
The people that I have personally dealt with, became possessed during the seance we call "tongues".
The people that I have personally dealt with, became possessed during the seance we call "tongues".
I have no idea what that means.
I have no idea what that means.
Then you have not spent any time planting a church in.South Chicago.
Then you have not spent any time planting a church in.South Chicago.
Well you are welcome to be as cryptic as you want. I will leave you to your misery.
Well you are welcome to be as cryptic as you want. I will leave you to your misery.
The original post was self-explanatory.
I apologize, I should have been more clear; I am particularly interested in extra-Biblical early church information concerning the topic, but I am also interested in any extra-Biblical pre-1906 information concerning speaking in tongues, ecstatic utterances and the like.
Your insistence that whatever went on in the 1850's was not Biblical is unnecessary, please read my stance concerning Biblical tongues in my OP. Again, with this insistence you are continuing to to take this thread in a direction I have repeatedly stated I do not intend for it to go. Did you read any of the information I posted by Mr. Sullivan? Perhaps you should, given your stance on the topic I think you would find it quite interesting and reading it would give you a basis from which to contribute to this thread.
I was being facetious, my apologies. You've posted enough on the topic that I understand your stance concerning it.
Just for clarification's sake; I am not looking to start a classical continuation vs. cessation debate, of which there is no shortage. I am looking for any pre-1906 extra-Biblical information pertaining to the history of ecstatic utterance/prayer languages, as well as information pointing to an earlier understanding concerning speaking in tongues such as those Mr. Sullivan has posted on his website (from Epiphanius, etc). I'm mostly interested in the pre-1906 era as there seems to be relative church silence on the topic for 1900 years prior. Even though I disagree with plain_n_simple's earlier statements concerning the topic, he did subsequently post exactly the kind of information I am looking for from his position on the topic. If everyone follows his example in this thread will fulfill its intended purpose.
Here is my understanding FWIW, Tongues died out towards the end of the 1st century certainly by the death of the Apostle John. In the 2nd century, there was a sect that emerged which wanted to "get back to that old time religion" named the Montanists where Tongues became an emphasis, eventually, the Montanists were absorbed into the Catholic Church.
Not sure if this helps or not? But you might want to look it up, if you are still interested--grace and peace to all
Originally Posted by John of Japan View Post
Every linguist who has researched glossalalia has come up with the conclusion that it is gibberish and has not the structure of a genuine language.
William Samarin researched modern tongues extensively, finding that they had no syntax or semantics, that they were "characterized by strings of usually simple syllables that are not matched systematically with any semantic system" (The New Charismatics, by Richard Quebedeaux, p. 202).
Wayne Oates, in "A Socio-Psychological Study of Glossalalia" (in Tongue Speaking in Biblical, Historical and Psychological Perspective), concluded that "Distortions of speech characteristic of early childhood are submerged as a child matures, but these distortions reappear in glossalalia when an individual tries to verbalize long-repressed religious convictions for the first time; he reverts to an early stage of communicative development" (ibid, 201).
CORRECT!!!
Every linguist who has researched glossalalia has come up with the conclusion that it is gibberish and has not the structure of a genuine language.
William Samarin researched modern tongues extensively, finding that they had no syntax or semantics, that they were "characterized by strings of usually simple syllables that are not matched systematically with any semantic system" (The New Charismatics, by Richard Quebedeaux, p. 202).
Wayne Oates, in "A Socio-Psychological Study of Glossalalia" (in Tongue Speaking in Biblical, Historical and Psychological Perspective), concluded that "Distortions of speech characteristic of early childhood are submerged as a child matures, but these distortions reappear in glossalalia when an individual tries to verbalize long-repressed religious convictions for the first time; he reverts to an early stage of communicative development" (ibid, 201).
CORRECT!!!