From: koberg@spot.Colorado.EDU (Allen Koberg)
Subject: Re: SATANIC TOUNGES
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 49

In article <May.6.00.34.49.1993.15418@geneva.rutgers.edu> marka@hcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com (Mark Ashley) writes:
>In article <May.2.09.50.21.1993.11782@geneva.rutgers.edu> mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>>I have seen the claims, but I don't know if there are any
>>authenticated cases of people making prolonged speeches in
>>real languages they don't know. From my observations, "speaking
>>in tongues" in practice has nothing at all do with this.
>
>I have a simple test. I take several people who can speak
>only one language (e.g. chinese, russian, german, english).
>Then I let the "gifted one" start "speaking in toungues".
>The audience should understand the "gifted one" clearly
>in their native language. However, the "gifted one" can
>only hear himself speaking in his own language.
>

There seem to be many points to the speaking in tongues thing which
are problematic.  It's use as prayer language seems especially troubling
to me.  I understand that when you pray in tongues, the spirit is doing
the talking.  And when you pray, you pray to God.  And the Spirit is
God.  So, the Spirit is talking to Himself.  Which is why I only go
by the Pentecost use where it's an actual language.

Moreover, the phrase "though I speak with the tongues of men and angels"
used by Paul in I Cor. is misleading out of context.   Some would then
assume that there is some angelic tongue, and if when they speak, it
is no KNOWN language, then it is an angelic tongue.

Hmmm...in the old testament story about the tower of Babel, we see how
God PUNISHED by giving us different language.  Can we assume then that
if angels have their own language at all, that they have the SAME one
amongst other angels?  After all, THEY were not punished in any manner.

So why do these supposed angelic tongues all sound different FROM ONE
ANOTHER?  It's disturbing to think that some people find ways to 
justify jabbering.

But I'll buy the idea that someone could talk in a language never learned.

Trouble is, while such stories abound, any and all attempts at
verification (and we are to test the spirit...) either show that
the witness had no real idea of the circumstances, or that outright
fabrication was involved.  The Brother Puka story in a previous post
seems like a "friend of a friend" thing.  And linguistically, a two
syllable word hardly qualifies as language, inflection or no.

Much as many faith healers have trouble proving their "victories" (since
most ailments "cured" are just plain unprovable) and modern day
ressurrections have never been validated, so is it true that no
modern day xenoglossolalia has been proved by clergy OR lay.
