I believe in tongues – but not to the extent that others might, say in the Pentecostal/Charismatic circles, but this article is interesting in the fact that it shows (1) Mormonism experimented with tongues, (2) tongues was prevalent in the early 19th century, and did not begin in 1916 and many believe, and (3) the practice of ‘teaching’ tongues has not changed.
Joel Martin, who has articles on Mormonism, relates to us the early practice of tongues among the followers of Joseph Smith -
On the opening of the year 1833, the “gift of tongues” again made its appearance at head-quarters, and from thence extended to all their branches in different parts…it would appear, from all the facts which we have been able to gather upon this subject, that if this gift were not supernaturally bestowed, it required but a few moments instruction from a priest, to render his pupil expert in various dead languages, which could never be understood by man or beast, except a supernatural power was at the instant given to some one present to interpret it. They sometimes professed to believe that these “tongues” were the same which were “confounded” at the building of Babel.
Some curious particulars are related respecting these blasphemous practices by a Mr. Higby, who was eight months an Elder in the Mormon church, and which he published in a small pamphlet. He says that shortly after he joined them, a Mormon Elder said to him, “you must go to work in the vineyard of the Lord as a preacher of the Gospel. I have viewed your heart by the spirit of discernment; I see what is in your heart and what the will of the Lord is, concerning you all.” Mr. Higby says that he was soon after ordained as an Elder in the said church, and commissioned to preach and baptize, ordain Elders, confirm the churches, heal the sick, in short, that he was ordained to all the gifts of the church, which were the same as given to the apostles of old. He continues – “about the 10th of April following, R. Cahoon and D. Patton came again to the place-a meeting was called, and previous to the meeting, they said that some one would speak with tongues before they left the place. Accordingly he set himself to work at that meeting to verify his prophecy. During the meeting he said, “Father H. if you will rise in the name of Jesus Christ, you can speak in tongues.” He arose immediately, hesitated, and said, “my faith fails me-I have not faith enough.” Said Patton, “you have-speak in the name of Jesus Christ-make some sound as you list, without further thought, and God will make it a language.” The old gentleman, after considerable urging, spoke and made some sounds, which were pronounced to be a correct tongue. Several others spoke in a similar manner, and among them was myself. I spoke as I listed, not knowing what I said, yet it was declared to be a tongue. The sound of the words used by some, in speaking in tongues, was a medium between talking and singing-and all, as I am now convinced, a mere gibberish, spoken at random and without thought.
[...]
“The next time those men came among us, they gave us a rule for speaking in unknown tongues, and also for interpreting what was spoken by others. This rule, they said, was perfect-that as long as we followed it we could not err. And so I believe; it was a prefect rule to lead men astray. The rule, as given by Cahoon, is this: rise upon your feet and look and lean on Christ; speak or make some sound; continue to make sounds of some kind, and the Lord will make a correct tongue or language of it. The interpretation was to be given in the same way.”
(Read the rest at the link above. For Brigham Young’s ‘miracle,’ click here.)
I am convinced that Joseph Smith never had an original idea – he is clearly associated with the Restorationist movement of that day, he is known to have used literary sources for the Book of Mormon, and his theories on the settlement of the New World by Jews was not new.
Yet, we have an early mention of tongue talking, by Mormons, akin to what we see today. (If you have to be taught to speak in tongues, it is a pretty sure thing that you are not doing it right.) Yet, it does reveal a certain fact in American history, that speaking tongues, and the variants of the act, is nothing new. What’s the saying? Often imitated, never duplicated.
Anyway, take a look at Joel’s (that is an awesome name) and see what early Mormons did – and then, when the next LDS missionary shows up at your door, ask them for a demonstration.
July 11th, 2009 11:06 pm
When I was about 10 years old, mum took us to a Catholic Charismatic meeting, and some people talked in tongues. I had no idea what was going on, and had always known since then that it was a load of rubbish. Last year, at Dr Kwan’s healing service they tried to, as I put it, ‘beat the Holy Spirit’ into me by getting me to say Hallelujah a million times – didn’t work. About the same time some Baptists told me speaking in tongues is from the Devil.
But at the end of July last year, while alone at home, I repented for my sins and asked God through Jesus for forgiveness, truly believed in Him and had Faith, and I immediately felt the Holy Spirit and a short time later talked in tongues.
I talk in tongues by faith in God.
The last time I went to Dr Kwan’s healing service, someone wanted me to talk in tongues for her so that she could decide whether it was the Holy Spirit or a demon. I politely declined. I do not need someone to to tell me their opinion. I know what the Holy Spirit is with me. And I no longer think tongues is a load of rubbish.
A great night at Hillsong a couple of months ago at a packed prayer meeting. 3,500 people all praying and talking tongues – just beautiful!
July 12th, 2009 3:01 am
I imagine even a Pentecostal would be rather insulted if you asked them for an on-the-spot demonstration of spiritual gifts.
People aren’t performing monkeys you know.
I imagine if you asked St. Peter himself to demonstrate the gift of tongues for you, he’d probably punch your smirking face.
And of course Joseph “never had an original idea.” That’s the whole point of the Mormon narrative. Surprised you missed that detail.
As for why the LDS doesn’t generally practice the gift of tongues…
Beats me. Perhaps they are in a state of apostasy themselves.
But that doesn’t mean your particular brand of Christianity isn’t still severely screwed up Polycarp. So I think you’re kidding yourself if you think you’re scoring any points here.
July 12th, 2009 10:02 am
No, I left when it became obvious that you were going to ignore my answers and keep changing the subject to other gripes about Mormonism.
Besides, I stuck with your site about a month longer than most people would have said I should have. Few people have time to deal with a huge laundry list of gripes and address each one by one.
How many cut-and-paste attack articles did you post during that brief period again?
July 12th, 2009 10:25 am
You didn’t prove anything. The limited issues I did respond to, you really didn’t have a response that would be satisfactory to anyone who didn’t already agree with you to begin with.
And don’t flatter yourself. I’m here because I have a set of Google Alerts for certain keywords like “LDS”, “Joseph Smith”, and “Mormonism.” Every time a blog or news article uses those terms, it shows up in my email inbox in digest format. I haven’t been following your blogging at all other than that.
July 12th, 2009 8:24 pm
Here you go:
http://www.google.com/alerts
Try using a basic Google Search before spouting off.
Obviously, you are already trying to shut down any conversation before it’s started. Just like you did last time.
July 12th, 2009 9:23 pm
Here you go, if you care:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy_not_Biblical
July 12th, 2009 9:43 pm
Paul was only talking about Bishops. No one else.
July 12th, 2009 9:57 pm
Care to prove he wasn’t? The verse says BISHOPS. What else do you need?
Yes. A man can become one with a wife. And then another wife. And then another wife.
And everything’s peachy as far as Jesus is concerned.
As for why Utah doesn’t allow it – probably because we obey the law. You guys almost annihilated our church over this issue if you don’t remember.
July 13th, 2009 11:15 am
Are you going to keep changing the subject again – like you did last time?
Why are you even bringing up Mountain Meadows?
I mean, I can address it if you want. But I’m not interested in hashing out every single little gripe you’ve got against Mormonism in this thread.
You’re falling into an age-old anti-Mormonism debate tactic.
Bring up one objection, and then when that argument doesn’t go so well, change the subject to another objection, and another if necessary. Keep doing this until the Mormon hits a question he can’t answer – then push at that answer incessantly, and then declare victory for yourself while ignoring all the other answers he gave you.
Your last foray into Mormon issues was like this. You punched out so many articles, bringing up so many different issues that there was really no way anyone with a day job was going to have time to answer them all.
So,,,
Are we going to set some parameters on this discussion? Or are you going to change the subject again?
July 11th, 2009 11:55 pm
NT, that is an excellent testimony concerning what Tongues really is about – it is personal, and cannot be taught or beat into one.
And I am glad that you are no longer going to Dr. Kwan’s.
July 12th, 2009 8:36 am
Ah, yes, I remember you Seth – the angry Mormon. I thought you left once you could no longer answer my points.
First, real tongues does not include a demonstration – unlike what the Mormons practiced. No one here would ask Peter that, Seth. We know that you cannot demonstrate tongues.
Actually, I included that detail in there for you Mormons. Figured it would bring a discussion.
Tell me, Seth, how is my ‘brand of Christianity’ ’severely screwed up?’
What point system?
July 12th, 2009 10:16 am
Seth,
You have no answers for Mormonism – It thought I proved that?
I never asked for the blessing of the return of the angry Mormon, Seth, but stay around – maybe you will learn something. Considering that I rarely post on Mormonism, I find it so amazing that you suddenly just popped in, especially have I switched sites. I figure that you have been reading all along, waiting for me to post something else.
I do not have ‘gripes’ with Mormonism, Seth – just pointing out the obvious false doctrine and erroneous facts which it is built upon. I would say, I posted about twice a day on Mormonism, for that week.
Why reinvent the wheel, Seth. I mean, Mormonism hasn’t come up with anything new – might as well as post the same tried and true methods of answering them.
Are we going to dance back and forth or are you going to actually try to give good reasons for Mormonism?
July 12th, 2009 4:46 pm
Seth – likely story about the ‘Google’ ‘alerts,’ as if there is such an animal.
All you are doing is playing a ‘I know you are, but what I am game.’ Please attempt a reasonable dialogue when you return.
July 12th, 2009 9:02 pm
Seth, learn some humor.
What conversation? You haven’t started yet. All you are doing is what happened last time – which is still up for the world to see.
How about this – answer the plurality of wives.
July 12th, 2009 9:41 pm
Oh, wow, you’re one of those Mormons? Actually, the bible promotes monogamy, through the example of Christ and the Church, and roundly condemns plural marriage.
Tell me, if it is so biblical, then why doesn’t Utah allow it?
BTW, you have to get around Paul’s commandments concerning marriage.
July 12th, 2009 9:48 pm
Care to prove that? And that is not the only place in the writings of Paul which declare monogamy. Further, Christ declares that two shall be come one. Not three or four or five.
http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/bible/monogamy
Further, you didn’t answer the other question.
July 12th, 2009 10:15 pm
Actually, Seth, I never did anything to Utah – thanks, though.
Yes, that verse does speak of overseers, but you still have yet to answer the many other verses. No, the bible speaks clearly – two shall become one. One. Not one here and one there. You are adding to Scripture. Further, concerning the ‘examples’ remember, the Patriarchs were not perfect. THey lied, cheated, stole, and murdered. Do you also follow those examples? Oh, yes, I forgot Mountain Meadows.
July 12th, 2009 10:31 pm
Seth, before you get too far out there, and unable to answer anything, let me say that I know a few Mormons – and I respect their lives, as they live a good moral life. They are honest, sincere, and helpful. It’s not Mormons that I dislike, but their doctrine.
July 13th, 2009 12:21 pm
You realize, Seth, that my use of Mountain Meadows was in response to your jibe about ‘my religion’ keeping yours down? You do understand that, right?
Ahh…so now, there was just so much information that you couldn’t respond? Really? Kind of makes the case that you don’t have a foundation.
Please, try to speak about the issues at hand, and do not get side tracked.