Hannah Hatfield
Mr. Newell
English 101-066
12 November 2009
What Language Am I Speaking Now? After becoming a Christian every person is granted a spiritual gift through the Holy Spirit. It is in these gifts one’s talents and abilities inside and out of the church are magnified tenfold to be used for the glory of God. Although some would deny the actuality of the spiritual gifts all together most would agree the existence of such gifts as wisdom, teaching, leading or compassion. However it is with the more controversial gifts that most evangelical Christians have suspicions towards, such as prophecy, the discerning of spirits and the working of miracles. However it is the gift of tongues which is the cause for most arguments concerning the spiritual gifts. In more conservative churches, the gift of tongues is not practiced, however in Pentecostal, as well as other charismatic churches the gift of tongues is considered accomplished. By discrediting those who speak in tongues, establishing the language itself and by citing Paul in his letter to the Corinthian church shows the gift of tongues or formally known as glossolalia, is no longer existent in today’s world but rather an outlet for emotion. Being able to disprove the gift of tongues through a psychological stand point by finding information correlating to glossolalia may be difficult however it is Daniel S. Smith and J. Roland Fleck in “Personality Correlates of Conventional and Unconventional Glossolalia” who finds that “contrast indicated that the nonglossolalic groups had both significantly higher abstract and vocabulary intelligence than the glossolalic groups” (215). This is by no means implying the lower intelligence of the glossolalic groups, in fact it was both Smith and Fleck which find that although glossolalics manage their emotions with physical and verbal attributes, the group was found to manage anxiety with ease and were much more emotionally sound in the long run (215). However both Smith and Fleck also state that glossolalic group of individuals all seemed to be from a lower social status than those of the nonglossolalic grouping (216). It is from a psychological perspective that those who claimed to speak in tongues were found to have better emotional health but overall seemed to be presented as lower to those who did not have the gift of glossolalia.
Although most would claim “tongues” are the overbearing, loud mumblings of one who has been invoked by the Holy Spirit, it is Paul who writes of the spiritual “groanings.” Biblically standing there are many passages discussing the gift and all of its requirements however in the entirety of the passages the gift of tongues is not clearly define. Many scholars have tried to determine the language of tongues, but to no avail are still left with the few pieces presented by Paul in Acts, Romans, Corinthians and other various books of the bible. The first theory of the language is that of “groaning.” It is in this theory that John Bertone states in “The Experience of Glossolalia and the Spirit's Empathy: Romans 8:26 Revisited” that “Paul's emphasis is on the "groanings"' expressed through the inarticulate language in the prayer…The believer benefits from the Spirit-induced glossolalic utterance that comes forth from his or her mouth, accompanied by "groanings" as communication to God” (58). These “groanings” are accounted for in scripture by Exodus 2:24 “God heard their groaning and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and with Jacob.” And again in Romans 8:22-23 and Romans 8:26-27 Paul expresses the language of tongues through “groaning.” Although there are scriptures to prove the language may be that of incoherent mumblings there are also verses to redirect the “groanings” meaning. Again it is Bertone who finds that the Greek root of the biblical word “groaning” was to portray extreme emotion (58). Such as in Malachi 2:13 which says “And this second thing you to. You cover the LORD’s alter with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand.” There are several other verses as well arguing that “groaning” is simply a tremendous outburst of emotion. Although Paul alludes to “groaning” being a type of prayer language or a version of tongues there is another form of glossolalia that is being practiced throughout the Pentecostal churches. To some the gift of tongues may be a considered a private prayer language set between one individual and God however to others it is meant for the whole congregation to hear. The second theory of the tongues is that of made up syllables also thought to be an ancient language used only by the angels. This theory comes from 1 Corinthians 14:2 “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” that the gift of tongues is not in inaudible groaning, but rather a non-understandable language given to the individual who is in possession of the gift. Again in 1 Corinthians 14:9 Paul talks about a language unknown to man. It is in this theory that Richard A. Hutch states in “The Personal Ritual of Glossolalia” that “[i]n spite of the possibility that such phrasing (e.g., “aish, nay, gum, tayo…”) may be a routine and inherited verbal formula derived or fabricated on the spot from the subject’s social and cultural circumstances, a distinct kind of psychological analysis holds sway”(257). This type of thinking tend to give a link to the psychology department arguing that tongues are a merely learned behavior, not so much a gifted act. Nils G. Holm presents this point best in “Suden’s Role Theory and Glossolalia” when he states “[n]ew generations in succession can learn the holy tradition and thus find themselves integrated not only with their own time but also, retrospectively, with the conditions of the “original” congregation” (384). Holm later continues explaining Suden’s thoughts on certain spiritual experiences such as speaking in tongues and how it is not a spiritual act but rather an act due to internal or external pressure (384). Holm states that “various complications affect[s] individuals went they take over glossolalia or alternatively when they do not adopt this behavior” (387). By this statement the illusion is given of the effects of the members in the current Pentecostal church where one must be baptized in the Holy Spirit or is not truly saved. One can only accomplish this by speaking in tongues. However it is not only in the forms of “groaning” do skeptics as well as identifiable sources believe that the gift of tongues is simply an outburst of extreme emotion. Hutch finds that the act of glossolalia is simply built up serges of emotions which after time is released in the form of tongues (257). This statement discredits the theory of “spirit invoked tongues” which is so often practiced by the charismatic churches. Although no one can truly state whether or not glossolalia is a silent groaning or a loud outburst of non-understandable sounds, of if it is a real experience or simply a psychological thought. The gift of tongues may have been active during the time of the new churches of Corinth however in today’s society the language of angels is nothing more than a spiritual myth. It is Paul that states that in 1 Corinthians 13:8 “Love never ends. … As for tongues they will cease;…” All facts point to the spiritual gift as being simply and outlet for emotions, nothing more.