@@AndreasWiget I have been watching a few more of your videos. I think I detect a general Calvinist perspective, unless I'm mistaken, to which I'm largely sympathetic. I'm curious about your subtle accent. I very much like the amicable 'vibe' you project in your clear presentations.
@@dr.philipblosser5603That’s right. I am a reformed Baptist from Switzerland. By the way, I also sent an email to Charles Sullivan a while ago. I attached a few quotes regarding Alfred Garr, which I thought would be interesting for The Gift of Tongues Project. I am a big fan of the research of you and Sullivan.
@@AndreasWiget Excellent. My family is of Swiss ancestry, from Langnau in the Canton of Bern. I attended Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Good to know you.
Excellent job Andreas!!! This is the perfect combination that I love, history, scholarship and research!!! As a person who loves history that is an unbeatable fusion!!!! I am going to watch this many more times to be sure I catch everything you said!!! Keep up the GREAT work my brother!!! I know you will!!!!!
I’ve never come across such exposition of the gift of tongues as per Andreas. Great work in explaining the tongues mess in Pentecostal ministries. Thank u.
So, Andreas, I speak several languages. If I am in an English-speaking congregation, and speak one of those languages (say Magyar or French) do I have a gift of speaking in tongues? Of course, I can also translate those languages. Do I have the gift of interpretation? And what kind of gifts are those, since I learned those (or I had the "gifts from God") before I became a Christian? Also, what's the meaning of 1 Cor 14:2 "he utters mysteries in the Spirit"? I don't need "the Spirit" to speak in my known languages. Thank you
No you don’t. It has to be a language that you have never learnt or known. So when you speak Magyar or French which you have previously learnt then it is not a gift of tongues. Neither is the interpretation for that matter as you already know the languages. If you want to call them a gift, you have a gift of language which can come from God. 1 Corinthians 14:2 (NASB95) For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries. If you can speak in tongues (which are languages not gibberish), you are speaking to God as no men can understand you even yourself if there is no interpretation. Only God understands you. You are basically uttering mysteries through your Spirit. If you are speaking languages known by you then it’s not the gift of tongues.
@@francischeah8486 Thank you for your clarification. But, why would I need to get a gift of an unknown tongue to speak to God? I read somewhere that God knows my thoughts.
When you speak with an unknown tongue, you are not speaking to men, esp when there is no interpretation. Hence you are only speaking to God. And I remind you tongues here is language which you do not know, not gibberish. You don’t need tongues to speak to God coz like you say God knows our thoughts. But if the Spirit gift you with this gift, you are speaking it even though you don’t want to. You are proclaiming the Gospel whether you want to or not. And if men cannot understand you (no interpretation) then you are only speaking to God in this context. You don’t need tongues to speak to God. You can pray with your understanding to God and He hears you.
What makes the gift what it is is that you never learned it. It is unbeknown to you. Any human language falls into that category. As long as you acquire the gift by not learning it through your mind, it is the gift of tongues.
Hey Andreas, hope all is well, the video was great. I'll be honest, my family falls a bit in the pentecostal/charismatic side (even though they say they don't believe in denominations). My dad wanted me to come along yesterday to church because he said they'd be praying for the Holy Spirit at the prayer service but I kinda knew that it meant they wanted tongues to happen and I didn't want to be part of that. Even today my dad wants me to go expecting that. I wish things were left in a point of "if it happens happens".
Once again you have helped me to understand this divisive issue (tongues) in the Church today. The knowledge of its history has been invaluable! Thank you for your very honest and credible research regarding it’s origins and progression.
Thankyou, brother Andreas. Will appreciate if you, or any christian that perhaps know of a Biblical/Reformed Baptist church in Amsterdam will please let me know. My sister's 25 year old son will soon be moving to Amsterdam to live and work there. We are concerned about him. Please pray for him.
Great content brother! A good question to ask tongues proponents is why so many have the gift of tongues and hardly anyone has the gift of interpretation.
Excellent work. I have always been taught that "tongue" was language. An actual language... so that each person heard the Gospel in their own language. (At Pentecost, IIRC.) I was raised Free-Will Baptist (I have since returned to Reformed Baptist theology, after more study in God's Word and the help of Calvin's Institutes and Luther's Bondage of the Will), and there were some churches in that denomination that had a practice of, when the preacher began to preach the word (almost screaming), the rest of the congregation would speak along with him, not in unison, but in a cacophonous soup of noise. I never understood that personally... because I didn't even hear the sermon... I heard lots of crosstalk, like 10 televisions on different stations all at the max volume. (The same thing happened during prayer at the closing of the service...all praying aloud and without regard for the person next to you.) Still, that being said... it was English. Apologies for the poor grammar. I have a head cold... things are moving at 1/2 speed in my brain. :)
I enjoyed this video. It would have been better to see the rest of 1 Corinthians 14:2. Unfortunately the Dr. Storm’s quote left out the end of the verse. “For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.” 1 Corinthians 14:2 ESV I think an additional word that should be studied is “mysteries” ie “mystērion” mystery or secret doctrine. There is about 23 other verses that help describe the word. Blessings and thanks for the video.
Thank, Desmond. That’s right, at the end of the video I actually refer to another video of mine in which I go through Corinthians, including the often misunderstood Greek word mysterion.
Great video Andreas I can see myself referring many commenters online to this. So many insist tongues are angel language or God language. They might deny this video in their stubbornness but I can’t deny you’ve done the research and have a pretty airtight case. Peace brother🙏✝️
What I have always thought was so ignorant in calling it speaking to God is God already knows our every thought. Why would I need to babble out loud to speak to him???
Great job demonstrating the history of ecstasy in relations to tongues. I'm curious if Dr. Storms addressed this in his book, or if he's unaware of it? May the Lord bless you and your efforts at proclaiming His truth.
Cmon admit it you laughed pretty hard when added the clip at the start to the video. thats so funny! gotta remember that one for the future! I think there is a saying. ShouldaboughtaHonda butiboughtaKia Repeat 10 times lol Im still looking into this gift of tongues stuff and i wont be babbling rubbish i know that but i gotta be Faithful to the LORD and Seek the Truth on the matter . still gotta Show grace to those who are decieved by False teaching
Really helpful. I did find it interesting how broad BDAG defined it. Schaff's definition has also been curious to me seeing that he was such a solid theologian and historian. The video definitely gave me some reassurance on the correct interpretation of this subject
Thanks, Sam. Yes, glossa has only two basic meanings: language and tongue. It might also refer to a specific aspect of a known language, or it can be used as a metonymy to refer to a nation (or people group). But anything that goes beyond that is wrong. In fact, Thomas Edgar points out that there is Greek vocabulary that describes "gibberish" talk, but it's not the word glossa.
Here is what Schaff writes in his “History of the Christian Church,” Vol. I, page 116: “The speaking with tongues is an involuntary psalm-like prayer or song, uttered from a spiritual trance, and in a peculiar language inspired by the Holy Ghost. The soul is almost entirely passive, an instrument on which the Holy Ghost plays His heavenly melodies.”
My speaks amazing gibberish, he makes it sound like it's his own language. Due to knowing this for a lifetime prior to becoming a Christian 8 years ago....I've always looked at people "speaking in tongues" and thought to myself they could really do a much better job with their gibberish.
Question mens motives, question the cultural influences of the time, questioning words. These are the same arguments I have received from unbelievers regarding the reliability of the Holy Word! Maybe I’m the one who is too simple, just not intellectually sophisticated enough to understand. I will just have to trust the Lord to help me. Sola Scriptura is really a vulnerable trusting and surrendering to someone whose intellect is beyond my own but who is totally trustworthy! I’m so thankful He is. I don’t put much effort into the manifest gifts, I am more of a “rend your heart not your garments” Christian, but I trust that the Word of God is truth and the final say.
A linguist's take on the modern "tongues" phenomenon - There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" - and there is only one type - when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually, but not always, unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) - it’s their native language (in some cases, it is a language the speaker has learned). In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with. It is, in part, typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, alliteration, assonance, and over-simplification of syllable structure. It is also interesting to note that any disallowed sound combinations, i.e. consonant clusters, in the speaker’s native language are also disallowed in his/her tongues-speech. Further, this subset of phonemes typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically. Occasionally some speakers will use two or more subsets of phonemes to generate glossolalia, producing what, to them, sounds like two (or more) distinct “tongues languages”, thus claiming to be able to speak in “divers tongues”. There is absolutely _nothing_ that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot be explained in relatively simple linguistic terms. Conversely, when it comes to something spoken, there are absolutely _no_ Biblical references to “tongues” that do not refer to, and cannot be explained in light of, real rational language(s), though it may not be the explanation you want to hear, and it may be one which is radically different from what you believe, or were taught. _Nowhere in the Bible is modern tongues-speech advocated or evidenced._ “Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will.
I'm not doubting or questioning the 'tongues experience'; glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. As one commenter put it, “Speaking in tongues distracts the ego/analytical/conscious mind while leaving the subconscious (the heart) wide open to import the divine." Both the spiritual and physical benefits of using this tool are also well documented. Again though, it is important to note that this same statement can be made for virtually _any_ other culture that practices glossolalia. Religious and cultural differences aside, the glossolalia an Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it, and where it comes from. Here's how I answer the tongues argument of 1 Cor. 14:2 - 1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps *the* quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible. Let’s paraphrase the KJB version of this verse into a more modern English. To do this, you need to get rid of the added “unknown”, use a more accurate translation from the Greek, and a more modern rendering of the archaic “tongue” - Once done, we have something more like this - “He that speaks in a language isn’t speaking to others, but only to God; no one hears [him] with understanding; nevertheless, though he’s praying in the Spirit, he’s speaking mysteries.” The whole passage is talking about real, rational language. Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything *but* English is pretty slim to nil. If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one _there_ will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at _that particular service._ In this sense, therefore, I am speaking _only to God,_ since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined in my original post), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” - i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me; no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language. When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying. There is _nothing_ in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even _remotely_ suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the _listeners_ who do not understand, *not* the speaker - no matter how hard modern tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….it just isn’t there.
Gibberish is Gibberish! Thank you for your explanation using history! One or two scriptures does not a Theology make, Context is Always Key! Paul even wrote if you want to speak your heavenly language do it alone so people won't think you are Crazy! How can we worship God with Gibberish, how do we Glorify God with Gibberish? God bless you brother and your ministry!
So basically, the definition of tongues as ecstatic utterances actually comes from liberal theologians denying that the tongues of Acts 2, 1 Corinthians, etc., could not have been real human languages because "miracles are not possible," just like they will date the synoptic gospels to after 70 CE because Jesus couldn't _possibly_ have known about the fall of Jerusalem. Lol! Also, when I _pray,_ ...in English, a real language... I also speak "not to men but to God"! So even the 1 Corinthians passage can mean a known human language.
There is so much about our supernatural God, including the Holy Spirit, that is beyond our understanding. But our humanity causes us to place limits on what God is and is not. Stick to the Gospel. I am not a fan of how denominations condemn and make jokes about other denomination's practices. We are supposed to be members of one body. It is okay to have differences in practices - as long as it stays within the confines of the Gospel to salvation IMHO
The problem is that some misuse scripture then make a new doctrine where by they blaspheme and take Gods name in vain by accrediting new cult like mystical doctrines to God that which is not biblical. Deluded people who are easily manipulated and who do not know history mock God with their foolishness. "Digging Deeper" we could call a prophet as he calls people to repent and turn away from untestable idiotic foolishness that takes Gods Holy name in vain. Like all prophets many will reject him because he didn't scratch their itching ears. Real tongues is a real miraculous sign where one can preach the Gospel to unbelievers in their own language and the person speaking was never trained in that language. You will find so called tongue speakers admit this is biblical but cant do it, all they can do is the untestable gibberish nonsense. Ironic.
@@lewislibre Exactly my point. You took the text that I wrote and turned it into your own thing - which happens to be very incorrect and very inaccurate. Imagine how much more you (me, and we) are vulnerable to doing this very same thing with scripture. I have been blessed and humbled enough to come into new understandings of scripture that I formerly misunderstood. God is the sovereign judge of our hearts, and He will judge and have mercy as He pleases. To me, these videos can be short sighted in the overall scheme of what it means to live for Christ. If the video focused on challenging doctrines that teach, tongues is the preeminent evidence of salvation (as some denominations believe), then I would feel differently. Pray that God gives us the wisdom and understanding we need when reading and discussing His Word.
Hmmn, i think this explanation is okay but in mark 16:17 Jesus says those that believe will speak in new tongues as a sign that follows them (very paraphrased). The catchy thing is the new to me😅 and according to the meaning of glossa that you've taught doesn't that mean a new language because it's the same word for "new" as in 2 Corin 5 and Gal 6 referring to a new creature in Christ. And if God can give entirely new languages, I think that will necessitate interpretation unlike in Acts 2 where they spoke in other tongues directly to the different peoples and there wasn't a need for interpretation because those they were speaking to heard them directly. And it's not the first time God created new tongues in scripture too, like in Babel. It's even easier to believe God can create new tongues than a new creature.
Hi there. This is not gonna hold water, my friend. First of all, glossa is never referring to ecstatic speech or free vocalization. Second, the Greek word "new" in Mark is kainos. This word does not necessarily mean new in substance but new to the possessor. Third, even Sam Storms agrees that the longer ending of Mark is not original. The verse you are referring to is not found in the oldest manuscripts, such as the codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. Most scholars believe Mark 16:9-20 is a later scribal addition (it's not written by Mark). Even if we consider this scribal addition as inspired, this scribe could not have meant that glossa (tongue) is referring to ecstatic speech because such an understanding of glossa did not exist before the 19th century. You might want to read this article regarding the longer ending of Mark: g3min.org/longer-ending-mark/
It'd be great if you could research how the Nestle-Aland / UBS new testament text got made and how it's based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts (codex b and aleph) and how the text alters the meaning in many places, how the two manuscripts don't match the textus receptus (which is based on different manuscripts, the Assyrian ones from Antioch) and how they even contradict each other. Then research in which bible versions the text is used. Hint: ESV, NIV, NASB...etc etc Btw. Here is proof it comes from the Vatican: “The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, an following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships.” (NA/UBS novum testamentum graece 27th edition p. 45).
So are you saying that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are not accurate ? Because they are way older than the Textus Receptus. Erasmus did not have nearly the amount of manuscripts we have today that prove the many errors in the KJV. Including the words “unknown tongue” . This phrase is only found in the KJV.
@@EdwinDekker71 that’s not really answering my question lol. And I guess your original comment not being clear means I’m giving an answer before I hear? No worries mate 👌
Always puzzles me why people who don't speak in tongues think that they are experts on the matter. This isn't rocket science. 1 cor14v4 and Jude 20 states that this gift build the inner man. It's what's happening inside of us that makes the changes and not what language that is being used. This gift transformed my Christian faith by developing the fruits if the spirit ; increased by desire to use the gifts of the spirit; made me more creative and more aware of what the Holy Spirit created. Also note that we don't speak this language in a public meeting unless it's interpreted however it's probably better to exercise the gift of prophecy. I'd encourage believers to urgently desire this gift so u can bike Paul who said he spoke in tongues more than anyone and addly enough also had more revelation than anyone.
1 cor 12:30 explicitly implies that not all speak in tounges as a gift only the Holy Spirit gives as he choses (1 cor 12:10-11). And if you claim you are edifying yourself, please explain to us how if you don’t know what you are saying. And do not try using Romans 8:26 to claim it’s the Holy Spirit interceding for you since the verse literally says “ the groanings of the Spirit CANNOT be uttered”. All gifts of the Spirit are for the benefit of others, not for self-edification.
@@Servantchild hi Joyson. I'm sure u r not telling me that the Holy Spirit hands out gifts that are useless. Like all Biblical gifts if u dont have the gift or if u don't use it then you simply don't benefit from it. 1cor14v4 and jude20 tell us exactly what happens when u speak in tongues. It's not the words but what's happening inside a person that makes this gift so potent.
@@markferguson1338 To be clear 1 cor 12:7 tells us that ALL spiritual gifts are for the benefits of others, not self. In fact in chapter 13, we are told that love is not self seeking in the context of spiritual gifts.Therefore, you cannot use one of God’s given spiritual gifts as a mean of self-edification. This idea goes against Paul argumentation in chapter 12-14 where he reiterates couple times to strive for the edification of the church. Speaking in languages is a spiritual gift given to some believers, not all and when used in church, there MUST be interpretation for the church to be edified. And No, there is no such distinction between a so-called private gift of tounges and public. This is a false distinction made my Pentecostal, where there is absolutely no difference. Assuming there is a difference is not the same as proven it. Claiming that somehow Paul is discussing multiple types of speaking in tounges in 1 cor 14 is just false. Also, Jude 1:20 has nothing to do with tounges since we know that all believers are commanded to pray in the Spirit, but not All are gifted to speak in foreign language ( 1 cor 12:30). God does not command us to do something, which he has not given all of us the ability to do. Please, repent for this false teaching embedded in Pentecostal doctrine proven to be false by Andreas. I pray that the Lord Jesus delivers you from this deception and allow you to see the truth. Love and peace.
Love your presentation!
What an honor to hear from you. Thank you so much!
Please also read the following article of mine on Alfred Garr. medium.com/@andreaswiget/alfred-garrs-failed-missionary-tongues-4d78da0a0232
@@AndreasWiget I have been watching a few more of your videos. I think I detect a general Calvinist perspective, unless I'm mistaken, to which I'm largely sympathetic. I'm curious about your subtle accent. I very much like the amicable 'vibe' you project in your clear presentations.
@@dr.philipblosser5603That’s right. I am a reformed Baptist from Switzerland. By the way, I also sent an email to Charles Sullivan a while ago. I attached a few quotes regarding Alfred Garr, which I thought would be interesting for The Gift of Tongues Project. I am a big fan of the research of you and Sullivan.
@@AndreasWiget Excellent. My family is of Swiss ancestry, from Langnau in the Canton of Bern. I attended Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Good to know you.
Excellent job Andreas!!! This is the perfect combination that I love, history, scholarship and research!!! As a person who loves history that is an unbeatable fusion!!!! I am going to watch this many more times to be sure I catch everything you said!!! Keep up the GREAT work my brother!!! I know you will!!!!!
Thank you so much, Steven! This is very encouraging!
Thank you for this well researched and balanced view of the gift of tongues.
You are welcome, Rebecca.
I’ve never come across such exposition of the gift of tongues as per Andreas. Great work in explaining the tongues mess in Pentecostal ministries. Thank u.
You are more than welcome, brother!
This channel is a mess
So brilliantly laid out!
Thank you, Melissa! Be blessed!
So, Andreas, I speak several languages. If I am in an English-speaking congregation, and speak one of those languages (say Magyar or French) do I have a gift of speaking in tongues? Of course, I can also translate those languages. Do I have the gift of interpretation? And what kind of gifts are those, since I learned those (or I had the "gifts from God") before I became a Christian? Also, what's the meaning of 1 Cor 14:2 "he utters mysteries in the Spirit"? I don't need "the Spirit" to speak in my known languages. Thank you
No you don’t. It has to be a language that you have never learnt or known. So when you speak Magyar or French which you have previously learnt then it is not a gift of tongues. Neither is the interpretation for that matter as you already know the languages.
If you want to call them a gift, you have a gift of language which can come from God.
1 Corinthians 14:2 (NASB95) For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.
If you can speak in tongues (which are languages not gibberish), you are speaking to God as no men can understand you even yourself if there is no interpretation. Only God understands you. You are basically uttering mysteries through your Spirit. If you are speaking languages known by you then it’s not the gift of tongues.
@@francischeah8486 Thank you for your clarification. But, why would I need to get a gift of an unknown tongue to speak to God? I read somewhere that God knows my thoughts.
When you speak with an unknown tongue, you are not speaking to men, esp when there is no interpretation. Hence you are only speaking to God. And I remind you tongues here is language which you do not know, not gibberish. You don’t need tongues to speak to God coz like you say God knows our thoughts. But if the Spirit gift you with this gift, you are speaking it even though you don’t want to. You are proclaiming the Gospel whether you want to or not. And if men cannot understand you (no interpretation) then you are only speaking to God in this context. You don’t need tongues to speak to God. You can pray with your understanding to God and He hears you.
@@schubetz It helps to keep in mind that the word "unknown" is not in the original Greek. It was supplied by the translators of the KJV.
What makes the gift what it is is that you never learned it. It is unbeknown to you. Any human language falls into that category. As long as you acquire the gift by not learning it through your mind, it is the gift of tongues.
Great breakdown! Confirms what I’ve studied and now understand.
Thanks!
Thanks for a good one, Andreas. Well done, as usually. Blessings!
Thanks Mike. Be blessed!
Hey Andreas, hope all is well, the video was great. I'll be honest, my family falls a bit in the pentecostal/charismatic side (even though they say they don't believe in denominations). My dad wanted me to come along yesterday to church because he said they'd be praying for the Holy Spirit at the prayer service but I kinda knew that it meant they wanted tongues to happen and I didn't want to be part of that. Even today my dad wants me to go expecting that. I wish things were left in a point of "if it happens happens".
Excellent video, Andreas! Your research skills and way you are able to communicate are unparalleled.
Thank you so much for your kind words! Be blessed!
Thank you! I learned something new about church history!
You are more than welcome, Nicolai!
Once again you have helped me to understand this divisive issue (tongues) in the Church today.
The knowledge of its history has been invaluable! Thank you for your very honest and credible research regarding it’s origins and progression.
Glad to hear that, Cheri. God bless you.
Thankyou, brother Andreas. Will appreciate if you, or any christian that perhaps know of a Biblical/Reformed Baptist church in Amsterdam will please let me know. My sister's 25 year old son will soon be moving to Amsterdam to live and work there. We are concerned about him. Please pray for him.
Great content brother! A good question to ask tongues proponents is why so many have the gift of tongues and hardly anyone has the gift of interpretation.
Seriously the deepest dive I’ve heard.
Hi andreas love your channel. Could you do a video on the Sozo healing? Thanks. Carmel
Hi Carmel. I think this is a good idea. But I don't know when this will happen. Blessings.
Excellent works. Thank you
Excellent episode as always
Thanks, brother!
I really enjoyed your video.
I am appreciative of your videos on this subject. 1:28
DD just terminated the modern tongues movement. 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Excellent work. I have always been taught that "tongue" was language. An actual language... so that each person heard the Gospel in their own language. (At Pentecost, IIRC.) I was raised Free-Will Baptist (I have since returned to Reformed Baptist theology, after more study in God's Word and the help of Calvin's Institutes and Luther's Bondage of the Will), and there were some churches in that denomination that had a practice of, when the preacher began to preach the word (almost screaming), the rest of the congregation would speak along with him, not in unison, but in a cacophonous soup of noise.
I never understood that personally... because I didn't even hear the sermon... I heard lots of crosstalk, like 10 televisions on different stations all at the max volume. (The same thing happened during prayer at the closing of the service...all praying aloud and without regard for the person next to you.)
Still, that being said... it was English. Apologies for the poor grammar. I have a head cold... things are moving at 1/2 speed in my brain. :)
Read about Alfred Garr and the Pentecostal redefinition of tongues here medium.com/@andreaswiget/alfred-garrs-failed-missionary-tongues-4d78da0a0232
I enjoyed this video. It would have been better to see the rest of 1 Corinthians 14:2. Unfortunately the Dr. Storm’s quote left out the end of the verse. “For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.”
1 Corinthians 14:2 ESV
I think an additional word that should be studied is “mysteries” ie “mystērion” mystery or secret doctrine. There is about 23 other verses that help describe the word. Blessings and thanks for the video.
Thank, Desmond. That’s right, at the end of the video I actually refer to another video of mine in which I go through Corinthians, including the often misunderstood Greek word mysterion.
@@AndreasWiget appreciate the additional info. I'll check it out soon.
Great video Andreas I can see myself referring many commenters online to this. So many insist tongues are angel language or God language. They might deny this video in their stubbornness but I can’t deny you’ve done the research and have a pretty airtight case. Peace brother🙏✝️
What I have always thought was so ignorant in calling it speaking to God is God already knows our every thought. Why would I need to babble out loud to speak to him???
Great job demonstrating the history of ecstasy in relations to tongues. I'm curious if Dr. Storms addressed this in his book, or if he's unaware of it? May the Lord bless you and your efforts at proclaiming His truth.
Thanks! He does not address it in his book. He does not examine the Greek word glossa in there. Be blessed.
Excellent video
Thanks, Debra!
Cmon admit it you laughed pretty hard when added the clip at the start to the video. thats so funny! gotta remember that one for the future! I think there is a saying. ShouldaboughtaHonda butiboughtaKia Repeat 10 times lol Im still looking into this gift of tongues stuff and i wont be babbling rubbish i know that but i gotta be Faithful to the LORD and Seek the Truth on the matter . still gotta Show grace to those who are decieved by False teaching
If you watched me editing my videos, you would often hear me laughing pretty hard. I admit it.
Being an Agnostic Atheist who is intetested in the Christian Faith, I found this really inspiring and high quality content.
I’m curious…What has caused you to be interested?
Really helpful. I did find it interesting how broad BDAG defined it. Schaff's definition has also been curious to me seeing that he was such a solid theologian and historian. The video definitely gave me some reassurance on the correct interpretation of this subject
Thanks, Sam. Yes, glossa has only two basic meanings: language and tongue. It might also refer to a specific aspect of a known language, or it can be used as a metonymy to refer to a nation (or people group). But anything that goes beyond that is wrong. In fact, Thomas Edgar points out that there is Greek vocabulary that describes "gibberish" talk, but it's not the word glossa.
Here is what Schaff writes in his “History of the Christian Church,” Vol. I, page 116: “The speaking with tongues is an involuntary psalm-like prayer or song, uttered from a spiritual trance, and in a peculiar language inspired by the Holy Ghost. The soul is almost entirely passive, an instrument on which the Holy Ghost plays His heavenly melodies.”
Thank you!
My speaks amazing gibberish, he makes it sound like it's his own language.
Due to knowing this for a lifetime prior to becoming a Christian 8 years ago....I've always looked at people "speaking in tongues" and thought to myself they could really do a much better job with their gibberish.
Awesome to see a young Swiss defend biblical faith...
Question mens motives, question the cultural influences of the time, questioning words. These are the same arguments I have received from unbelievers regarding the reliability of the Holy Word! Maybe I’m the one who is too simple, just not intellectually sophisticated enough to understand. I will just have to trust the Lord to help me. Sola Scriptura is really a vulnerable trusting and surrendering to someone whose intellect is beyond my own but who is totally trustworthy! I’m so thankful He is. I don’t put much effort into the manifest gifts, I am more of a “rend your heart not your garments” Christian, but I trust that the Word of God is truth and the final say.
A linguist's take on the modern "tongues" phenomenon -
There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Biblical "tongues" - and there is only one type - when referring to something spoken, they are nothing more than real, rational language(s); usually, but not always, unknown to those listening to them, but always known by the speaker(s) - it’s their native language (in some cases, it is a language the speaker has learned).
In contrast, the “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing underlying sounds (called phonemes) of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with.
It is, in part, typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, alliteration, assonance, and over-simplification of syllable structure. It is also interesting to note that any disallowed sound combinations, i.e. consonant clusters, in the speaker’s native language are also disallowed in his/her tongues-speech. Further, this subset of phonemes typically contains only those sounds which are easiest to produce physiologically.
Occasionally some speakers will use two or more subsets of phonemes to generate glossolalia, producing what, to them, sounds like two (or more) distinct “tongues languages”, thus claiming to be able to speak in “divers tongues”.
There is absolutely _nothing_ that “tongues-speakers” are producing that cannot be explained in relatively simple linguistic terms.
Conversely, when it comes to something spoken, there are absolutely _no_ Biblical references to “tongues” that do not refer to, and cannot be explained in light of, real rational language(s), though it may not be the explanation you want to hear, and it may be one which is radically different from what you believe, or were taught. _Nowhere in the Bible is modern tongues-speech advocated or evidenced._
“Praying in the Spirit” does _not_ refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will.
I'm not doubting or questioning the 'tongues experience'; glossolalia as the spiritual tool that it is, can be very powerful and, for many people, the experience is profound. As one commenter put it, “Speaking in tongues distracts the ego/analytical/conscious mind while leaving the subconscious (the heart) wide open to import the divine." Both the spiritual and physical benefits of using this tool are also well documented. Again though, it is important to note that this same statement can be made for virtually _any_ other culture that practices glossolalia. Religious and cultural differences aside, the glossolalia an Evenki Shaman in Siberia, a vodoun priestess in Togo and a Christian tongues-speaker in Alabama are producing are in no way different from each other. They’re all producing their glossolalia in the exact same way; they just have different explanations and beliefs as to why they’re doing it, and where it comes from.
Here's how I answer the tongues argument of 1 Cor. 14:2 -
1Cor. 14:2 is perhaps *the* quintessential verse used by many to “evidence” modern tongues-speech in the Bible.
Let’s paraphrase the KJB version of this verse into a more modern English.
To do this, you need to get rid of the added “unknown”, use a more accurate translation from the Greek, and a more modern rendering of the archaic “tongue” -
Once done, we have something more like this -
“He that speaks in a language isn’t speaking to others, but only to God; no one hears [him] with understanding; nevertheless, though he’s praying in the Spirit, he’s speaking mysteries.”
The whole passage is talking about real, rational language.
Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in “East Haystack”, some remote town in the US out in the middle of nowhere, two things are going to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone speaks anything *but* English is pretty slim to nil.
If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a single word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one _there_ will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at _that particular service._
In this sense, therefore, I am speaking _only to God,_ since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined in my original post), to the people listening to me, I’m still speaking “mysteries” - i.e. even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me; no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language.
When one looks at the original Greek, the verb which is usually translated as “understandeth/understands” is actually the verb “to hear” in the sense of understanding what you’re hearing someone say. The verb is *not* “to understand”. That part of the verse is more properly “no one hears [him] with understanding”, i.e. no one listening to him understands what he’s saying.
There is _nothing_ in this passage that suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even _remotely_ suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying. The Greek bears this out; it is the _listeners_ who do not understand, *not* the speaker - no matter how hard modern tongues-speakers want the speaker to also not understand…….it just isn’t there.
Wow, thanks for that! Can I share your observations on Facebook? I will give you proper credit as an official linguist.
@@AndreasWiget
Sure, you've very welcome to!
Cheers!
@@kavikv.d.hexenholtz3474 I shared it on Twitter and Justin Peters retweetet it. It got quite some attention. I properly gave you credits.
@@AndreasWiget
Wow, cool! Thanks
@@kavikv.d.hexenholtz3474 Can you send me a DM on Facebook?
Gibberish is Gibberish! Thank you for your explanation using history! One or two scriptures does not a Theology make, Context is Always Key! Paul even wrote if you want to speak your heavenly language do it alone so people won't think you are Crazy! How can we worship God with Gibberish, how do we Glorify God with Gibberish? God bless you brother and your ministry!
So basically, the definition of tongues as ecstatic utterances actually comes from liberal theologians denying that the tongues of Acts 2, 1 Corinthians, etc., could not have been real human languages because "miracles are not possible," just like they will date the synoptic gospels to after 70 CE because Jesus couldn't _possibly_ have known about the fall of Jerusalem. Lol!
Also, when I _pray,_ ...in English, a real language... I also speak "not to men but to God"! So even the 1 Corinthians passage can mean a known human language.
I would greatly recommend reading ( What Meaneth This ) by Carl Brumback
I love your little sheep!
There is so much about our supernatural God, including the Holy Spirit, that is beyond our understanding. But our humanity causes us to place limits on what God is and is not. Stick to the Gospel. I am not a fan of how denominations condemn and make jokes about other denomination's practices. We are supposed to be members of one body. It is okay to have differences in practices - as long as it stays within the confines of the Gospel to salvation IMHO
The problem is that some misuse scripture then make a new doctrine where by they blaspheme and take Gods name in vain by accrediting new cult like mystical doctrines to God that which is not biblical. Deluded people who are easily manipulated and who do not know history mock God with their foolishness. "Digging Deeper" we could call a prophet as he calls people to repent and turn away from untestable idiotic foolishness that takes Gods Holy name in vain. Like all prophets many will reject him because he didn't scratch their itching ears. Real tongues is a real miraculous sign where one can preach the Gospel to unbelievers in their own language and the person speaking was never trained in that language. You will find so called tongue speakers admit this is biblical but cant do it, all they can do is the untestable gibberish nonsense. Ironic.
Sounds like you hate the boundaries the Bible gives us on certain things about Gods nature
@@lewislibre Exactly my point. You took the text that I wrote and turned it into your own thing - which happens to be very incorrect and very inaccurate. Imagine how much more you (me, and we) are vulnerable to doing this very same thing with scripture. I have been blessed and humbled enough to come into new understandings of scripture that I formerly misunderstood. God is the sovereign judge of our hearts, and He will judge and have mercy as He pleases. To me, these videos can be short sighted in the overall scheme of what it means to live for Christ. If the video focused on challenging doctrines that teach, tongues is the preeminent evidence of salvation (as some denominations believe), then I would feel differently. Pray that God gives us the wisdom and understanding we need when reading and discussing His Word.
Hmmn, i think this explanation is okay but in mark 16:17 Jesus says those that believe will speak in new tongues as a sign that follows them (very paraphrased). The catchy thing is the new to me😅 and according to the meaning of glossa that you've taught doesn't that mean a new language because it's the same word for "new" as in 2 Corin 5 and Gal 6 referring to a new creature in Christ. And if God can give entirely new languages, I think that will necessitate interpretation unlike in Acts 2 where they spoke in other tongues directly to the different peoples and there wasn't a need for interpretation because those they were speaking to heard them directly. And it's not the first time God created new tongues in scripture too, like in Babel. It's even easier to believe God can create new tongues than a new creature.
Hi there. This is not gonna hold water, my friend. First of all, glossa is never referring to ecstatic speech or free vocalization. Second, the Greek word "new" in Mark is kainos. This word does not necessarily mean new in substance but new to the possessor. Third, even Sam Storms agrees that the longer ending of Mark is not original. The verse you are referring to is not found in the oldest manuscripts, such as the codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. Most scholars believe Mark 16:9-20 is a later scribal addition (it's not written by Mark). Even if we consider this scribal addition as inspired, this scribe could not have meant that glossa (tongue) is referring to ecstatic speech because such an understanding of glossa did not exist before the 19th century. You might want to read this article regarding the longer ending of Mark: g3min.org/longer-ending-mark/
It'd be great if you could research how the Nestle-Aland / UBS new testament text got made and how it's based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts (codex b and aleph) and how the text alters the meaning in many places, how the two manuscripts don't match the textus receptus (which is based on different manuscripts, the Assyrian ones from Antioch) and how they even contradict each other. Then research in which bible versions the text is used. Hint: ESV, NIV, NASB...etc etc
Btw. Here is proof it comes from the Vatican:
“The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, an following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships.” (NA/UBS novum testamentum graece 27th edition p. 45).
So are you saying that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are not accurate ? Because they are way older than the Textus Receptus. Erasmus did not have nearly the amount of manuscripts we have today that prove the many errors in the KJV. Including the words “unknown tongue” . This phrase is only found in the KJV.
@@roberttrevino62800 they come *from the vatican*. Proverbs 18: 13.
@@EdwinDekker71 that’s not really answering my question lol. And I guess your original comment not being clear means I’m giving an answer before I hear? No worries mate 👌
Always puzzles me why people who don't speak in tongues think that they are experts on the matter. This isn't rocket science. 1 cor14v4 and Jude 20 states that this gift build the inner man. It's what's happening inside of us that makes the changes and not what language that is being used. This gift transformed my Christian faith by developing the fruits if the spirit ; increased by desire to use the gifts of the spirit; made me more creative and more aware of what the Holy Spirit created. Also note that we don't speak this language in a public meeting unless it's interpreted however it's probably better to exercise the gift of prophecy. I'd encourage believers to urgently desire this gift so u can bike Paul who said he spoke in tongues more than anyone and addly enough also had more revelation than anyone.
1 cor 12:30 explicitly implies that not all speak in tounges as a gift only the Holy Spirit gives as he choses (1 cor 12:10-11). And if you claim you are edifying yourself, please explain to us how if you don’t know what you are saying. And do not try using Romans 8:26 to claim it’s the Holy Spirit interceding for you since the verse literally says “ the groanings of the Spirit CANNOT be uttered”. All gifts of the Spirit are for the benefit of others, not for self-edification.
Did you even watch this video?
@@Servantchild hi Joyson. I'm sure u r not telling me that the Holy Spirit hands out gifts that are useless. Like all Biblical gifts if u dont have the gift or if u don't use it then you simply don't benefit from it. 1cor14v4 and jude20 tell us exactly what happens when u speak in tongues. It's not the words but what's happening inside a person that makes this gift so potent.
@@AndreasWiget yes. To me your video comes across as very negative about this very important gift and complicates something that is very simple.
@@markferguson1338 To be clear 1 cor 12:7 tells us that ALL spiritual gifts are for the benefits of others, not self. In fact in chapter 13, we are told that love is not self seeking in the context of spiritual gifts.Therefore, you cannot use one of God’s given spiritual gifts as a mean of self-edification. This idea goes against Paul argumentation in chapter 12-14 where he reiterates couple times to strive for the edification of the church. Speaking in languages is a spiritual gift given to some believers, not all and when used in church, there MUST be interpretation for the church to be edified. And No, there is no such distinction between a so-called private gift of tounges and public. This is a false distinction made my Pentecostal, where there is absolutely no difference. Assuming there is a difference is not the same as proven it. Claiming that somehow Paul is discussing multiple types of speaking in tounges in 1 cor 14 is just false. Also, Jude 1:20 has nothing to do with tounges since we know that all believers are commanded to pray in the Spirit, but not All are gifted to speak in foreign language ( 1 cor 12:30). God does not command us to do something, which he has not given all of us the ability to do. Please, repent for this false teaching embedded in Pentecostal doctrine proven to be false by Andreas. I pray that the Lord Jesus delivers you from this deception and allow you to see the truth. Love and peace.
😂