Glossolalia vs. Xenoglossy

Side note:  Spell check knew “glossolalia”, but not “xenoglossy”.

Both  can be referred to as “speaking in tongues”, but they are different and (as one website put it) should be distinguished from each other as often as possible.

Definitions:

Glossolalia. From (from Greek γλωσσολαλιά and that from γλῶσσα - glossa “tongue, language” and λαλεῖν (lalein) “to talk”) - this is copied and pasted so if it’s not exactly correct, hopefully it’s good enough for a lay person.
Trying to find an “official” definition that clearly defines glossolalia as different than xenoglossy and isn’t biased in terms of Continuationist vs. Cessationist has turned out to be an interesting side trip.  It was easier to get the definition from a secular dictionary.

The ability or phenomenon to utter words or sounds of a language unknown to the speaker, especially as an expression of religious ecstasy. Also called glossolalia, speaking in tongues.

The important key words are “words or sounds”.

A less generous defintion (both from answers.com):

Fabricated and nonmeaningful speech, especially such speech associated with a trance state or certain schizophrenic syndromes.

Xenoglossy.  (from Greek ξενογλωσσία - xenoglossia, from ξένος - xenos, “foreign” + γλώσσα - glossa, “tongue, language”).

This was an easier defintion (from worldwidewords.com):

The ability to speak a language without having learned it.

The important key word:  language.

Compare:

• both glossolalia and xenoglossy use “sounds” or “words” that do not belong to a language that the speaker knows.
• Both can be associated with religious activity.

and contrast:

• glossolalia belongs to no known language.  Pentecostals call this “tongues of angels” and it may be referred to as a “private prayer language” that nobody (except presumably God) can understand.
• xenoglossy can be identified as a real language and can be understood by a person who speaks that language.  In some cases it is claimed that a 2-way conversation has taken place between a native speaker and the “tongues-speaker” who has never been exposed to that language.

In short:  real language vs. not real language.

Other handy definitions:

• Cessationism:  the view that the charismatic (or prophetic) gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as tongues, prophecy, and healing, were only given to the new church for a period of time and ceased either at the end of the apostolic era or shortly after.
• Charismatic: the general term used to describe Christians who believe that these same gifts are available to Christians today (see “Continuationism”).  Closely related to Continuationism, and I’m not sure of the difference, other than continuationism is the belief and charismatic is the movement.  Also see “Pentecostal” - although, you can be charismatic without being Pentecostal.    Mark Driscoll refers to his church as being “charismatic with a seatbelt”, which I think is a way of saying, “we’re charismatic but not Pentecostal.”
• Continuationism: the view that these same gifts continue to this present age and are available for all Christians alive today.
• Pentecostal: the belief that a “born again” Christian can (and should) receive a subsequent experience of a “baptism of the Holy Spirit”, the initial evidence of which is speaking in tongues as the Sprit gives utterance.  Some Pentecostals believe and teach that a person who has not spoken in tongues (received the baptism of the Holy Spirit) is not saved.  All Pentecostals believe that the “gift” of tongues is THE gift that proves the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2).  The other gifts were given later and a believer does not have tongues or another gift…it is always tongues plus the rest of the gifts listed later.

Here’s the problem:  Christians are not the only group of people who experience glossolalia and xenoglossy.

(Blinders: ON) But There’s No Slippery Slope…

Leaders of the Presbyterian Church (USA) overturned a long-standing ban on the ordination of gays and lesbians Friday, providing yet the latest example of a religious denomination struggling with how, and whether, to incorporate homosexuality into church life.(…)

I feel proud of my church today,” said Lisa Larges, national coordinator for That All May Freely Serve, an organization that advocates for gay equality in the Presbyterian church.

Larges, who lives in San Francisco and attended seminary there, has fought unsuccessfully for more than two decades to become a Presbyterian minister.

“I think a generational shift is what we are witnessing,” she said Friday. “There is a whole generation coming of age for whom acceptance is a given. The church is beginning to experience that sea change.”

No…no slippery slope at all…

And no generational shift, either.

A Very Brief Look at the Pentecostalism that I See

From the outside looking in, it seems to me that Pentecostalism is very “self” centered theology.

There is a lot that is about “self”.

“I claim…“

Some teach that if you pray in the right formula, use the right words, then God is honor-bound to give you what it is that you ask for. The Holy Spirit becomes something like a magic genie in a lamp. Rub the lamp the right way and you get your wish.
Some real life examples…

I was at my mom and dad’s church on Sunday morning (if Mom reads, please let me know if I get this wrong.) The man who said the public prayer - in the prayer he told the congregation of a situation of a man who is sick or injured (I wasn’t very clear which, but God knows).

“Lord, WE claim healing…You promised that if WE have faith you will give us what we ask for.”

~~~~~

At work a woman I work with had a cold - and so did I. I took ester-C, echinacea and zinc (my usual “cocktail”.) She said, “I’m CLAIMING my healing!” My cold lasted for about 10 days…hers lasted for about a week and a half.

~~~~~

I hear on a pretty regular basis, “the power of life and death is in the tongue, you know!” My reply the first time was “my future is in the hand of a sovereign God who is in control of the universe.” After that I let it slip by.

~~~~~

Before I went “reformed”, even before my husband died, I remember being on the way to a quiz meet with the kids and one of the church leaders was telling us on the way (in a van) how important prayer is. The reason?

Because without our prayers God is helpless to give us what we need or want. The power of God is released by our prayers.

Now I am Reformed and I find myself seeing how this warped sense of “self” has infiltrated many, many churches. I belong to a sovereign God who is in control of the universe.

The whole of TULIP is wrapped up in the power of God, not the power of “me”.

PCA

Today we visited a “Presbyterian Church in America” church.

My first time every in a Presbyterian church. I’ve looked at the theology and the basic “what we believe” statements and they line up for me.

I don’t know much about the day to day workings of this denomination, but I liked the church:
- they used hymnals
- they sang “doxology”
- they celebrate the Lord’s Supper every week
- they have a choir
- they use music (not just words - real music. This is important because I’m a low alto, but I sight read; I can’t use my “ear” to find the notes)

They start at 9:30 (why do so many Reformed churches start at the :30’s?), which works for me, but the kids are used to sleeping late (my son often works until 11:00 at night) - but it works.

We’ll go back next week.

I’m a Proud Mom

I’m proud of my daughter (although the spelling is a little “off”)

Both my kids have blogs and this was posted on Manda’s last Wednesday:

I hope all goes well for my mom tonight. She has a meeting with Pastor Bryan. A couple weeks ago we had dome people from new oraleans come to preach at our church. It was so wrong … just wrong! The chick was calling herself profetess, and the guy was calling himself apostle. Like i said … wrong. We are a Christian Reformed church. Not an apostic church. What did they think they were doing … and the chick spent more time at the polpet then the pastor did it seemed like … she said 5 minutes and went on for half an hour. and then she “imparted” the gift of profecy onto our pastors wives. Only God can gives us our gifts. And Pastor Dave is going down the same path they are. oh and “Apostle” Sherman L. Shelton told us something along the lines of God put our Pastors in authority we should submit to their authority and follow them even if they’re leading us in the wrong direction. Thats the dumbest (i dont think thats even a word) thing i’ve ever heard! but my mom is going tonight to talk to Pastor Bryan about it, i really do hope all goes well and he understands and acts on her complaints … GO MOM!

The Meeting With My Pastor Went Very Well

The meeting went very well. There are still some concerns on my part, but I’m content with the general direction the church is headed.

I asked if I were the only one who had brought forward concerns - the answer is no, there were a lot of concerns brought up in small groups that Sunday and they were addressed in church the week that we were out of town.

I asked the pastor if he had looked at the Firehouse Family Ministries website and he told me that he didn’t even know they had a website. I explained what I had found and gave him a printout of my post from here. Ok…

He also told me that our church did not know, when the work team headed for New Orleans, who they would be helping. The context of the work team was that they were working through another evangelical disater relief organization. The “hookup” with Firehouse was not planned ahead of time.

He could somewhat anticipate my questions because of all the concerns brought up by others.

No, we are not “going all Pentecostal”
No, we are not going “word faith”
No, we are not going “Five fold ministry”

Parts of the service were not expected - the Shelton’s had come to give a “thank you” message.

Yes, the pastors are, at their core, very reformed (I ate dinner at the “all church supper” with Pastor Brian with a couple who is new to the church - they decided that there were things in Roman Catholic teaching that are not in the Bible so they left that religion - and we talked about “election” for about 45 minutes)

We went over what I discovered by just poking around and he agrees with what I found, other than his take on “language barriers” - sometimes the words that we use “sound like” what other people are using, but we don’t mean the same thing. Yeah. Then don’t use the words that have been co-opted by heretics.

There are big plans for our church and they are definitely talking about a singles ministry! Brian asked me what I thought would be the best route to take - a ministry that targets specific needs, or a general social group? I told him, why not both? with our small group system in place, a single person could have their social needs met, while addressing specific needs in a small group setting that targets their circumstance.

Anyway, there were a couple of other things (minor) that we talked about and I left feeling pretty good about the whole thing.

Meeting with my pastor

I’ll be meeting with my pastor (and his wife) on Wednesday at 5:00 (eastern). I’d sure appreciate prayers. This pastor’s wife is the one that the “prophet” “imparted” the gift of prophecy to.

- that my personality would disappear and that anything that is not of God remain unsaid.
- that only God’s Word would be used
- that only God would be glorified
- that I would remain unflustered and calm so that God can work in me and through me.

I’m working on “talking points” and a paper to leave with him.

Please feel free to tell a bit of the story and pass the word. I don’t feel worried or concerned - but I am working on being prepped.

thanks…

Calvinism…and TULIP

I picked my daughter up from her Wednesday night youth group and they covered (drumroll….) TULIP.

She has a pretty good grasp - limited atonement sort of eludes her and she doesn’t really like the doctrine of election. Then again, neither do I, but I accept it as truth.

I’m glad that they’re covering these issues - but it makes it very frustrating to know that on one hand, the youth are covering Reformed doctrine - and on the other hand, there are “apostolic oneness” prophets and apostles invited into our pulpit. What is the message that we are sending?

Wade Burleson, IMB and technophobia

I was reading a few things on the situation between the International Missions Board (Southern Baptist Church) and Wade Burleson. I’m not going to get into the controversy – if anybody wants to read about it, it’s easy enough to find. This post is really just kicking around a couple of thoughts that a friend and I talked about – in relation to modern technology.

What I want to hone in on is this paragraph from Mr. Burleson’s blog

(3). Most trustees are fifty or older. Some are in their seventies. I am not sure how many have ever read my blog, but some think a blog is like “computer pornography” (an actual quote). I really think if the trustees took time to hear my motives, communicate with me, and recognize that even though I am “new,” effectual work could be accomplished.

Mr. Burleson has been vocal (on his blog) about his disagreement with a policy of the board. There is a certain type of person who will not even listen to any defense for the sole reason that they might have to sit down in front of a computer.

There are a lot of folks in the church (and church leadership) who are behind the times – technically speaking. I suppose we could call them “techno-phobes”.

The “prophet” at our church last Sunday – I found out all I needed to know just by poking around their website a little bit. I believe I remember that one of our pastor’s is not exactly computer-savvy – is this why these folks could slip by? I need to find out (from Pastor Brian’s mouth) if he knew what these people are – or if he just didn’t know enough to find out.

That’s kind of what Mr. Burleson is saying about the age 50+ trustees. They sure don’t appear to have a very good comprehension about what a blog is – much less how Mr. Burleson was using his.

Did their lack of computer knowledge have an effect on the decisions that have been made? If so, what kind of effect? Can a person who does not even know what a blog is (and who has never read one) really make an informed decision about what a man wrote on his blog?

If some of the trustees have not read Mr. Burleson’s blog – how can they come to a truly informed decision about what he wrote there?

Today’s “Prophets”

I just posted on hope - and how knowing the future can interfere with it.

It’s Wednesday now and I’ve had a little more “processing time” after seeing the “prophet” at my church. I’ve been waiting on a call from my pastor since Monday (sometimes it takes a while to get through his assistant, who was out of the office).

I’ve led a sheltered life. This is the first time that I’ve seen (in person) a “modern day prophet” in action.

I didn’t trust her. Here’s what happened. The “apostle’s” wife (the prophet) came up on the stage at the end of the service and offered a prophecy to the pastors and their wives. She had talked about the time they had all spent together and the prophecy didn’t seem like anything that she would not have gleaned just from being with these people for several hours over dinner. Then she “prophesied” over the church. Basically, follow your leaders. (I think there might be a reason for that.)

Then, after the congregation was released, she stayed on the stage and “prophesied” over individuals. Some things I’m pretty sure that she could not have known, others she might have asked a question or two and found out something.

But there was a crowd of people who wanted to know what was in their future. Is this what God wants for us - really?

Does He really want us chasing after the Christian equivalent of fortune tellers, or does He want us leaning on Him; trusting in His goodness?

God didn’t send His prophets to tell His people that they (as individuals) were going to marry this man or that woman; that they were going to move to a different city, that they were going to change jobs or that their future was rosy.

No.

When God sent His prophets, they told the people exactly what they did not want to hear.

The woman I saw on Sunday told people only good things. And vague things. And things that will be forgotten in a short time.

We laugh at the “prophet” on the street corner. You know - the one that doesn’t look the way we think a prophet should look. The one that probably looks the way John the Baptist looked after living in the desert and eating grasshoppers for a few months. The one that tells us that the end is near. Yeah. That one.

But the pretty one in the nice suit, we flock to. You know - the one that tells us that everything is going to be good. The one that tells us we’re going to lose weight. Or that we’re not going to be alone. Yeah. That one.

It brings doubts to my mind when we only embrace the “prophet” that tells us the pretty things.

thought?

Partnership with the Vatican?

I got the original story here: Beggars All: Reformation and Apologetics: Pope Making Friends With 75 Million Reformed Christians

First, I think it’s important to note that the partnership with Rome involves social justice, not doctrine.

And that when Bishop of Rome talks about ecumenicalism, he means that he wants to bring all protestants back under the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church.

We are “separated brethren”. Referring to the Roman Catholic faithful, Vatican II says, “Their ecumenical action must be fully and sincerely Catholic”

Also in Vatican II, “Though the ecclesial Communities which are separated from us lack the fullness of unity with us flowing from Baptism…” (my take on this - ok…we’re saved, but we’re not that saved)

Vatican II says that “The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.” (Again, we’re saved, but Christ’s finished work on the cross isn’t finished unless we’re under the leadership of Rome)

Bishop of Rome, Benedict XVI said, in his first messages as Bishop of Rome, “But what is most urgently needed is that “purification of memory”, so often recalled by John Paul II, which alone can dispose souls to accept the full truth of Christ.” (Who has the “full truth of Christ”? According to Rome, the Roman Church is the church that has the full truth)

My questions are: Whose memory needs to be purified? What do they need to forget in order to “accept [Rome's] full truth of Christ”?