Is Tongues-speech A Human Foreign Language?

[Guest Syble]

<div class='quotemain'>

Why you wouldn't want a purer form of praying to the Father than having this intervention happen is a mystery to me. (I stand by my first conclusions, if not even more strongly, after reading your continued defense and discription.) It seems to me as a form of seeking for a sign and only a wicked and adultrous generation seeks for such. I continue to pray for you.

Two thoughts: 1. Why would I seek a biblical pattern of prayer--one that allows my Spirit to directly commune with the Father, without human filter or hindrance? You don't know? Or is the "poorness in Spirit" that surrendering one's tongue to the Spirit requires, just a little to humbling? 2. To assign malicious motives to believers practicing a form of prayer that is repeatedly layed out in Scripture is just plain odd.

And a question: Did you used to be a fundamentalist Baptist, and when President Hinckley said, "Bring all that is good with you," you thought he meant rabid anti-Pentecostalism?

I see no humility in your posts, so I would assume you haven't the humility required for such a thing as the gift of tongues and you are being grossly deceived. I will continue to pray for your spiritual recovery.

[prisonchaplain]

I see no humility in your posts, so I would assume you haven't the humility required for such a thing as the gift of tongues and you are being grossly deceived. I will continue to pray for your spiritual recovery.

You confuse the spiritual confidence I have in the Holy Ghost, and the gifts He bestows, with personal arrogance on my part. Perhaps a story will illustrate the 'poorness in Spirit' I speak of. I'm not sure the year, but it is the late 19-teens, or early 1920s. In this era most Christians considered Pentecostals to be very odd cultists (anyone familiar with the feeling?). An Presbyterian minister, pastoring a wealthy downtown congregation, senses a dryness in his spirit, and decides to go "incognito" to the Pentecostal revival meeting, happening--of course--on the other side of the tracks. He prays, "Lord, if there is anything for me here, I want it. But, do not embarrass me. Do not make me fall down, or babble foolishly." Every night he goes, senses a powerful presence of God, but receives nothing. After three weeks, he can no longer stand it. He's so hungry and thirsty for righteousness--for the power and presence of the Holy Ghost in his life. His prayer changes. "Lord, anything! Do anything you want. I'm so hungry for you!" Down he goes, 'babble' he does. But he leaves the place with such joy, such peace, such spiritual confidence. The following Sunday, he explains to his congregation what has happened to him, how happy he is, and how wonderful it would be if the church could enter into this fullness of the Spirit. Like so many other Christians of that era, who came into the Pentecostal fullness, they congregation promptly dismissed this pastor, and likely changed the locks. He ended up starting a store front congregation somewhere, and never looked back.

You might say this pastor lacked humility for putting his family and his church through such a changed. I would suggest he discovered what it truly means to be "poor in Spirit." I have nothing and I am nothing, save God work through me.

[Guest Syble]

Are you familiar with the Story of Joseph Smith asking if Martin Harris could take the 116 pages to a specialist for varification? He kept asking after he had received the answer of no. What did he get when he first ignored the Lord's first responses?

Just because he finally got what he wanted, doesn't validate the response as being the best thing or right thing.

[Guest Monica]

Anybody speak in tongues here?

[Guest Syble]

Anybody speak in tongues here?

I get it once in a while when useful. I had it all the time in the mission field.

[Guest MrsS]

Are you familiar with the Story of Joseph Smith asking if Martin Harris could take the 116 pages to a specialist for varification? He kept asking after he had received the answer of no. What did he get when he first ignored the Lord's first responses?

Syble, you have your stories mixed up a little here. Martin Harris did pester Joseph Smith about taking the 116 pages, but it was to show to his family. Specifically his wife who was against Joseph Smith. She was angry with Martin for giving so much money to Joseph Smith.

http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=t...;fn=default.htm

The Work of Translation

35448, Our Heritage, 2: Establishing the Foundations of the Church, Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon, 5

Martin asked Joseph if he could take 116 pages of translated material home to show his family members to prove to them the validity of the work they were doing. Joseph asked the Lord for permission, but the Lord’s answer was no. Martin pleaded for Joseph to ask again, which Joseph reluctantly did two more times and finally received permission. Martin made a covenant to show the manuscript only to certain people, but he broke his promise, and the pages of manuscript were stolen. This loss caused Joseph inconsolable grief, for he thought that all his efforts to serve the Lord had been lost. He cried, “What shall I do? I have sinned—it is I who tempted the wrath of God. I should have been satisfied with the first answer which I received from the Lord.” 1

Martin Smith most definately did take some of the translations to be verified. You are correct there.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/55-65#55

62 By this timely aid was I enabled to reach the place of my destination in Pennsylvania; and immediately after my arrival there I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the aUrim and Thummim I translated some of them, which I did between the time I arrived at the house of my wife’s father, in the month of December, and the February following.

63 Sometime in this month of February, the aforementioned Mr. Martin Harris came to our place, got the characters which I had drawn off the plates, and started with them to the city of New York. For what took place relative to him and the characters, I refer to his own account of the circumstances, as he related them to me after his return, which was as follows:

64 “I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters. He gave me a certificate, certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation of such of them as had been translated was also correct. I took the certificate and put it into my pocket, and was just leaving the house, when Mr. Anthon called me back, and asked me how the young man found out that there were gold plates in the place where he found them. I answered that an angel of God had revealed it unto him.

65 “He then said to me, ‘Let me see that certificate.’ I accordingly took it out of my pocket and gave it to him, when he took it and tore it to pieces, saying that there was no such thing now as ministering of angels, and that if I would bring the plates to him he would translate them. I informed him that part of the plates were sealed, and that I was forbidden to bring them. He replied, ‘I cannot read a sealed book.’ I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned what Professor Anthon had said respecting both the characters and the translation.”

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/55-65#55

Heavenly Father knew that Martin Harris was going to lose the 116 pages, but Martin Harris had a lesson to learn. In my opinion, Heavenly Father used this loss as further proof of the validity of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

[Guest MrsS]

<div class='quotemain'>

Anybody speak in tongues here?

I get it once in a while when useful. I had it all the time in the mission field.

Where did you serve your mission? In my 39 years as a member, I have only met three sister missionaries. I think that at times they have it a bit harder than the young men; yet they bring such a special spirit to the mission. At one ward I was in where we had the sister missionaries, they didn't have more convert baptisms, but what occured was the converts didn't become inactive after a few years.

[Serg]

I think Prisonchaplain is not being arrogant, but rather confident in his faith. We should be too. When Edipus attacked the prophet calling him a murderer, and the prophet said NO , NEVER, YOU DID IT! Edipus thought he was being arrogant but he was just defending his assurance of something. So when Alma, Moroni, Paul, and many others in scripture said "Ill see you in Paradise!" that doesnt mean that they were bragging because of their good works that already bought heaven, but they were confident in the GRACE of Christ knowing that they were all good they could do and even if they would have been less good still Christ would have saved them for it is because of His grace not our only effort, so when he says in the 7th chapter to the church , What shall we expect?" He syas "To see our salvation" , so in that confidence he talked, and all did, because if we dont have assurance of salvation through the sake of t he covenant, why are we here?

[thursday]

I am a Mormon who has not been through the temple and has stopped attending Church regularly because I speak in tongues and am afraid it's demonic. No one knows that I speak in tongues. I've been living with this for over seven years. I don't want to go to the Bishop about it. What am I supposed to do?

[Blackmarch]

Ray and I had an interesting dialogue going about LDS essentials, and the testimony that the Holy Ghost gives came up, as well as talk about Holy Ghost anointing. Inevitably (that is if you have such a discussion with a Pentecostal minister, it's inevitable) the issue of tongues came up. I thought it might prove interesting to some, so I offer my take as a new string. Also, check the link for a charismatic Catholic's take on the issue.

Pentecostals contend that the gift of speaking in tongues need not be a human language. In fact, in the context of 1 Corinthians 12-14, it probably was not. Otherwise, why have the gift of interpretation? If the primary purpose of the gift of tongues is to communicate a gospel message in a foreign tongue, as some suggest, then the receiver would not need an interpreter. Tongues-speech itself was not understood by the church. Paul also said that speaking in tongues edifies the individual, but it's the interpretation that edifies the church. Thus, the context was that the tongues-speech was an unknown language.

For a more in depth explanation—one offered by a charismatic Catholic, if I’m not mistaken, see the following link:

http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ34.HTM

The people in the LDS community that i've run into that have experienced "Tongues" has been in regards languages between people so that they can understand each other, or so that an individual can receive understanding. That generally that is how it has been applied, but it is not necessarily limited to languages on the earth.

[bytebear]

I only read the first few pages, so forgive me if I sound non-sequiter.

I don't think the LDS apostles would disagree with Prison Chaplain's interpretation of the gift of tongues. But I do think the issue is with how it is used. There is only one aspect of weekly worship that is required, and that is the sacrament. Gifts of the spirit, at least in my experience, has been something very private and personal, and not for public display in a worship service. We don't do miraculous healings, we don't do snake handling. We don't speak in tongues as an aspect of worship.

There is a purpose for each gift, and as D&C 46 says not all gifts are given to all people, and I suspect that some of these gifts are very rare. Healing blessings are done through priesthood power, although some may have the gift of healing. But with priesthood all ordained may give healing blessings regardless of whether they have the gift or not. I believe missionaries are given the gift of tongues and interpretation as part of their calling.

As a side note, is there no discussion on the Adamic language and how it relates to speaking in tongues? There are only two situations where I know this relates, and they both have to do with temples, so maybe speaking in tongues is specifically related to temple worship and dedication, and not for "common" use.