Speaking in tongues Linguistic Study
In a massive study of tongue speaking from a linguistic perspective by Professor William J. Samarin of the University of Toronto's Department of Linguistics, published after more than a decade of careful research, he rejected the view that glossolalia is xenoglossia, i.e. some foreign language that could be understood by another person who knew that language. Professor Samarin concluded that glossolalia is a “pseudo-language.” He defined glossolalia as “unintelligible babbling speech that exhibits superficial phonological similarity to language, without having consistent syntagmatic structure and that is not systematically derived from or related to known language.” (William J. Samarin, “Variation and Variables in Religious Glossolalia,” Language in Society, ed. Dell Haymes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972 pages. 121-130)
Felicitas D. Goodman, a psychological anthropologist and linguist, engaged in a study of various English, Spanish and Mayan speaking Pentecostal communities in the United States and Mexico. She compared tape recordings of non-Christian rituals from Africa, Borneo, Indonesia and Japan as well. She published her results in 1972 in an extensive monograph (Speaking in Tongues: A Cross-Cultural Study in Glossolalia by Felecitas D. Goodman, University of Chicago Press, 1972).
Felecitas Goodman concludes that “when all features of speaking in tongues were taken into consideration, which is the segmental structure (such as sounds, syllables, phrases) and its suprasegmental elements (namely, rhythm, accent, and especially overall intonation), she concluded that there is no distinction in tongues between Christians and the followers of non-Christian (pagan) religions. Goodman in the prestigious Encyclopaedia of Religion (1987) wrote the “association between trance and glossolalia is now accepted by many researchers as a correct assumption”. Goodman also concludes that glossolalia “is, actually, a learned behaviour, learned either unwarily or, sometimes consciously.” Others have previously pointed out that direct instruction is given on how to “speak in tongues,” ie. how to engage in glossolalia. In fact, it has been found that the “speaking in tongues” practiced in Christian churches and by individual Christians is identical to the chanting language of those who practice voodoo on the darkest continents of this world.
Some who speak in tongues are also becoming involved in “holy laughter, drunk in the spirit” laughing uncontrollably, falling down on the ground, rolling around, having seizure like activity, being struck dumb, or being “slain in the spirit.” Jesus never behaved that way, nor did He heal that way. The only time you see anything that resembles that behaviour in the Bible is with demon possessed people Jesus delivered that were out of control, writhing on the ground. When Jesus cast out the demons and delivered them, they sat quietly with dignity. 1 Corinthians 14:40 says, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” The Bible never demonstrates such disorderly behaviour in the Church.
Very few people realize the tremendous forces locked within our emotional nature. Some are more susceptible than others. With the correct environment, the long hours of praying for one thing, the music, sobs, entreaties of those around, the mind becomes weary and the emotions take over. The effects can be dramatic, almost overwhelming. This can be so even when glossolalia appears outside the necessity of such emotional props.
Glossolalia has even been manufactured by University students in America (some of whom were atheist and had no religious interest at all) as a demonstration of what can happen given the right emotional environment and the right emotional effort. To quote one example, in Geelong, Victoria, Australia, two men as an experiment (again apart from religion) spoke in tongues after repeating “Timbucktoo” in the right emotional setting. One in just a few minutes and one partly after two hours! (Modern New Tongues” p. 59 – A.S. Hill).
Its universal appeal can be seen in its evidence amongst both Catholics and Protestants, Christian and Heathen, those living good moral lives, those living in sin. All can, and do, experience this phenomena. That in these conditions “Tongues” CANNOT be a sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit becomes immediately evident.
Healing services and glossolalia have been, and possibly still are, being conducted in the Catholic University of Notre Dame (Christianity Today:, p.40, May 26, 1967.) And so it does not matter whether a person is a Catholic believing in the Pope, or a Protestant, a Christian or heathen. Living a good life or living in adultery, believing in baptism by immersion, or sprinkling, smokers or non-smokers. Drinkers or teetotallers, believing in the Virgin Birth or scoffing at the idea – it makes no difference. All speak with “Tongues!” Obviously the tongues are not self-authenticating. There is no sign here of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit or of anything else.
There have been instances of real foreign languages being spoken in meetings as fun or as an experiment and invariably receiving an “interpretation” wholly at conflict with what had been said! A young Dutch person entered a Pentecostal Assembly recently and rattled off a Dutch fairy story receiving an interpretation that God was asking the assembly to pray for the poor in China! A tape recording of glossolalia will receive totally different interpretations from those purporting to have the gift of interpreting. This is all very sad.
Another aspect that is very noticeable is that an English Pentecostal speaking in tongues, though it may be quite unintelligible, is still recognizably English in intonation and syllable construction. Essentially he is still speaking “English.” So also with other nationals. A Scotchman is still “Scottish.” A Frenchman still is “French” in intonations and syllable construction. Obviously, however sincere these people are, the whole thing becomes a sham and a fraud. Many become victims of their own emotions “aided by the great deceiver.”
It is clear Pentecostals, which we once were, have no right at all to use the term “Pentecostal” for at Pentecost real recognizable languages were spoken whereas amongst so-called “Pentecostals” this never happens.
Pentecostals and others engaging in tongue speaking as seen today normally say any or all of the following;
Tongues are a sign of Baptism in the Holy Spirit – but the Bible never says that.
All should speak in tongues – but the Bible never says that.
The initial experience of tongue speaking at the Baptism is different from the later “gift of tongues” – but the Bible never says that.
That tongues are, or can be a heavenly language – but the Bible never says that.
Tongue speaking is for the benefit of believers – but the Bible never says that.
Tongue speaking is for the most part unintelligible – but the Bible never says that.
These unintelligible tongues are Christian – but the Bible and history indicate that they are heathen.
The tongue speaking movement is bringing into its arms of influence both Roman Catholics and Protestant Churches. In other words you will find the emphasis in the Catholic Church just as strong as in the Protestant and evangelical Protestant churches and the more stable Protestant Churches, i.e. Anglican Churches, Methodist churches as well as the Pentecostal type churches as Apostolic. Right through Christendom today you’ve got a cross-section all claiming the gift of tongues and the gift of healing. All these Churches, Catholic Protestant, Evangelical Protestant, and Liberal Protestant all claim the gift of tongues. This is evidence that the tongues they are speaking are the counterfeit. The Bible says that when the Holy Spirit comes into a person’s life it leads him into all truth, according to John 16. He will guide us, it says, into all truth. Catholics say when they have the gift of tongues it helps them to better appreciate the Virgin Mary and the infallibility of the pope. It helps them better in their confessional to the priests. Now doesn’t that immediately confirm something? Do you mean to say that the Holy Spirit when it comes into your life is going to help us believe in the Blessed Virgin Mary more, it’s going to help us believe in a counterfeit religion? All the Protestant churches with exactly the same gift of tongues believe it helps them to accept Jesus and His sacrifice more. If it’s supposed to be the same spirit there’s a problem isn’t there? It is clearly evident that it’s a spirit alright, but it’s not the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit, when it comes guides us and leads us into all truth, not just some of the truth.
(Ku belom tau ini dari mana, tapi dapat dari kopasan 1peH)