Christopher Hitchens Dies

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
221

[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< I don’t know any Christian who’s certain about everything in their life, and specifically has no confusion in their faith life >>>[/quote]Never said that. What I did say was

“I AM absolutely 100% sure and certain about everything I say all the time, every time unless otherwise noted. This is called conviction. I am NOT open minded, like Satan would love for me to be. The objections people throw at me bounce off like cottonballs off a Sherman tank. As I say. Everywhere it matters most? My concrete hardened decades ago. I have not heard a new argument for 20 years. Ohhh how offensive that is huh? This is the 21st century. Nobody can be that certain right? Unless of course they’re pushing junk science in defense of the utterly demonic doctrine of macro evolution. That we’re certain about”.

Everything I say. There’s plenty I’m uncertain about. I just don’t say it. Will I still be wrong about something I say on occasion. I’m sure, but please give me an example of something I’ve I’ve said that you think is wrong that I hold everybody else too or I question their salvation.

You agree with this Storey guy who misrepresents what I’ve said TO YOU in the last day or so in this very thread and who denies the necessity of even the most basic Christian truths. Little stuff like, the triune Godhead, the blood of Jesus, the resurrection. You know. All that tired old dogma that poor ol Trib thinks Christians oughta believe to be considered Christians.

I walked in a prayer March last April (was on the media team) with 28,000 other believers through downtown Detroit. Believers from over 500 local churches with a whole range of theological backgrounds most of which were not mine. I sang with them, I prayed with them and I walked with them. Ya know what we ALL had in common?

The unshakable conviction that the bible is the infallible Word of the one true and living God who eternally exists in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That the first literal man Adam, created by the hand of God Himself, as our father and acting federal head plunged every last person born on this earth into eternal perdition by his disobedience to the unquestionable authority of his God. That the one and only remedy for this universal death in sin is the sinless life, blood sacrifice and literal bodily resurrection of the God/man Jesus of Nazareth “in whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily”. That the denial of these and a handful of other defining necessities was ipso facto a denial of God and His risen Christ and thereby a self condemning proclamation of ones anti Christian status.

That’s how it’s always been see. Until recently. Come on. Don’t be shy. I’ll respect you more, which I never ever said you should care about, but I will. If you just please, pretty please take a stand and own that you do not buy what I am sayin. I beg of thee. Please? No non committal “well I don’t like to look at things exactly that way”. Please? Just say it? The old time gospel of sin and holiness and all that crap has outlived it’s usefulness. We need new fresh perspectives to appeal to the modern man. Forget all that doctrine, just kissy kissy kissy love Jesus and it’s cool. Come on. Are you gonna deny that’s what you think.

You’ve already told me you hold that abhorrent equivalent of the roman doctrine of “invincible ignorance”, whereby people who’ve never heard of Jesus might be saved nonetheless. Shock of all shocks, Push says he holds that as well. Along with every other bible butchering liberal. If your PHD’s disagree with the above list they ARE NOT Christians and their views on the bible mean less than nothing. A lifetime of study minus surrender to God equals heightened judgement. If they say they agree. See what they think of that blasphemous Debbie Blue sermon. The woman you recruited to explain me to these unbelievers. I can explain myself thanks. I don’t need some God hating liberal to speak for me. She has zeeroh insight on anything.

I do not have to read her equally blasphemous book. Your Louie Simmons analogy IS crazy BTW, from a Christian perspective. This ain’t squatting man. Ya know what’s really funny? Quick Ben of all people. Who thinks I am a pathetic, deluded, fantasy chasing idiot will get this better than you seem to be. Come one Ben. How’s this sound? “well I sure don’t believe any of that crap, but I do see where he’s comin from. I mean it doesn’t seem unreasonable for there to be some definitions that come from the bible for people who are claiming to be Christians after all”. Is that close at all.

Instead of killing off the gospel into meaninglessness by a thousand qualifications, why don’t people just pick something else to claim to believe. I can suggest dozens. Here ya go, Ben likes Hinduism. Perfect. Then you don’t have to have a bible and 2000 years of universal testimony from the church buggin you all the time. Problem solved. You can believe whatever you want and leave Jesus out of it.

Where am I wrong?

222

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I am NOT open minded, like Satan would love for me to be.
[/quote]

223

I wasn’t going to comment on Hitchens. Some of my friends and family liked him. I always felt he did more harm than good in his chosen field. I tend to blame people like him for much of what’s wrong with society today.

224

Aragorn,

read this link that Tirib posted earlier, and I daresay it will give you a better understanding of where he is coming from. A Defense of Reformed (biblical) Presuppositional Apologetics by Cornelius VanTil

Starring as Mr. White: Tiribulus
Co-star as Mr. Black: Quick Ben
Co-star as Mr. Grey: Aragorn

And you Tiribulus,

as a good friend pointed out to me last night, one does not figure out one’s relationship to God by declaring war on other religions. As such, I apologize if I implied you were stupid or insincere. I still think you’re crazy, but rest assured that is a far better option than thinking you are RIGHT :slight_smile:

225

It’s actually refreshing to see someone stand up for what the bible actually says, instead of trying to make evolution, homosexuality, and open minded tolerance part of a religion that obviously is anything but. The Lutherans in my country have a female bishop championing gay marriage. Which is great of her to champion a good cause (acceptance and equal rights for homosexuals), but ENTIRELY unbiblical. I don’t understand how she can call herself a priest.

226

At first I was dissapointed to see that the Hitchens memorial thread was bait for another argument on the subject of religion, but on second thought I think the man himself would be happy to see the way this has turned out, for several reasons.

I’m sorry to see him go, and at the same time very proud to watch a nonbeliever die without floundering about at the last minute.

To indulge the imagination for a minute, if Hitchens did go to hell I imagine he would only be relieved that Heaven rejected him. I forget which athiest said it, but heaven would be a worse punishment for a humanist than hell, for in heaven one would have to reflect on all the people suffering for an eternity below.

Thanks to Tiribulus for staring the thread, regardless of his intentions.

227

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
Aragorn,

read this link that Tirib posted earlier, and I daresay it will give you a better understanding of where he is coming from. A Defense of Reformed (biblical) Presuppositional Apologetics by Cornelius VanTil

Starring as Mr. White: Tiribulus
Co-star as Mr. Black: Quick Ben
Co-star as Mr. Grey: Aragorn

And you Tiribulus,

as a good friend pointed out to me last night, one does not figure out one’s relationship to God by declaring war on other religions. As such, I apologize if I implied you were stupid or insincere. I still think you’re crazy, but rest assured that is a far better option than thinking you are RIGHT :)[/quote]AND[quote]It’s actually refreshing to see someone stand up for what the bible actually says, instead of trying to make evolution, homosexuality, and open minded tolerance part of a religion that obviously is anything but. The Lutherans in my country have a female bishop championing gay marriage. Which is great of her to champion a good cause (acceptance and equal rights for homosexuals), but ENTIRELY unbiblical. I don’t understand how she can call herself a priest. [/quote]Don’t ask me exactly how Ben, but I knew you’d get it. What’s more, is the western church today is FULL of self deluded Mr. Blacks who are trying to wear Mr. Grey’s suit. The church has become the world with a Jesus mask on. I know you’ll get that too. I hope you read that whole page eventually if you didn’t. Van Til revolutionized my life by simply lifting the shade and letting the light of what had been staring me right in the face in the pages of scripture come flooding in.

EDIT: OOPS, I almost forgot. God is always the star, but I knew what you meant. The prophet Jeremiah preached unceasingly for 40 years to a whoring rebellious nation of Israel and nobody listened.

He sat weeping, watching Jerusalem burn under the judgement of the Lord their God as he wrote the book of Lamentations. His favor with God and hence his success was the result of his obedience to the Word of the Lord, not the response of his audience. I am no Jeremiah, lest I be woefully misunderstood. His faithfulness is however an example I try to follow.

I believe with every fiber of my being that the 66 books of the holy bible are the revealed mind of almighty God. I declare them as such. Jeremiah did not call the scholars of the law to see if they liked what he was going to say. LOL!. No sir. They were one of his primary targets. “Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel. If you do not forsake your idols and whoredoms and return to me, your covenant husbandman, I will stomp your livin brains out from one end of Mesopotamia to the other”.

And that’s putting it quite mildly. He used the pagan nations, full of sickness, violence and perversion to bring their sickness, violence and perversion as judgment upon His own covenant people. He can do that ya know. Sparky’s objections be damned.

The visible church today is every bit the whoring idolatrous backslider that Israel was. Hence, the spiraling decline of the west. There is no mystery here for me.

228

It will be interesting to see Aragorns take on this, if he does read the link.

229

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:<<< I apologize if I implied you were stupid or insincere. I still think you’re crazy, but rest assured that is a far better option than thinking you are RIGHT :)[/quote]I do truly appreciate that Ben. Thank you. I am indeed a fool for Jesus and wouldn’t have it any other way. See if you can make it through the whole thing =] - YouTube
Oh yeah, @ this Ambugaton guy. I wasn’t baiting anyone. No need. I have faaaaar more action here than I can possibly keep up with as it is. Look around.

230

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
Aragorn,

read this link that Tirib posted earlier, and I daresay it will give you a better understanding of where he is coming from. A Defense of Reformed (biblical) Presuppositional Apologetics by Cornelius VanTil

Starring as Mr. White: Tiribulus
Co-star as Mr. Black: Quick Ben
Co-star as Mr. Grey: Aragorn

And you Tiribulus,

as a good friend pointed out to me last night, one does not figure out one’s relationship to God by declaring war on other religions. As such, I apologize if I implied you were stupid or insincere. I still think you’re crazy, but rest assured that is a far better option than thinking you are RIGHT :)[/quote]

Interesting reading. I don’t agree with my co-starring as Mr. Grey, but thanks for giving me a cameo. I prefer to be the observing scientist, thank-you-very-much :slight_smile: I haven’t finished the link yet, but I did start. Gotta get out to do some things but I will return in a number of hours and try to finish.

The primary reason I say this is that in my current role in this thread, I play the person who brings in a suggestion to one side that might enable them to start to answer one of their questions to the believers, and then is summarily attacked by the believers and questioned by the non-believers alike, one side because they think I am saying something I am not and the other because they’re just questioning.

You have to realize I intentionally have tried to maintain a sort of observing debater’s perspective here. Whether that has succeeded or not I don’t know, but my instincts say that it has not because you Ben still consider me a “nutbag believer” and Tirib has declared war on me for “not being saved” or something. Either way, my intent was simply to drop a drive-by suggestion down for those interested but I did in fact fail that objective. I never once put “conversion” on my list of motives for the book suggestions.

Think of me as attempting the dispassionate observer without being collateral damage. Do I have a stake in this issue? Yes. Am I trying to keep it out? Yes. A good objective scientist keeps himself out of being invested in a fight that is not his–and this is a thread between Tirib and others, not me. I originally just stopped by to say RIP Hitchens, because I respected his intellectual acumen.

Interestingly enough, I do my best to keep my “invested” conversations taking place primarily through PM. In Private. I certainly don’t always succeed in that though.

231

[quote]Ambugaton wrote:
At first I was dissapointed to see that the Hitchens memorial thread was bait for another argument on the subject of religion, but on second thought I think the man himself would be happy to see the way this has turned out.[/quote]

Lol. The irony was not lost on me. :slight_smile:

232

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< I don’t know any Christian who’s certain about everything in their life, and specifically has no confusion in their faith life >>>[/quote]Never said that. What I did say was

“I AM absolutely 100% sure and certain about everything I say all the time, every time unless otherwise noted. This is called conviction. I am NOT open minded, like Satan would love for me to be. The objections people throw at me bounce off like cottonballs off a Sherman tank. As I say. Everywhere it matters most? My concrete hardened decades ago. I have not heard a new argument for 20 years. Ohhh how offensive that is huh? This is the 21st century. Nobody can be that certain right? Unless of course they’re pushing junk science in defense of the utterly demonic doctrine of macro evolution. That we’re certain about”.

Everything I say. There’s plenty I’m uncertain about. I just don’t say it. Will I still be wrong about something I say on occasion. I’m sure, but please give me an example of something I’ve I’ve said that you think is wrong that I hold everybody else too or I question their salvation.

You agree with this Storey guy who misrepresents what I’ve said TO YOU in the last day or so in this very thread and who denies the necessity of even the most basic Christian truths. Little stuff like, the triune Godhead, the blood of Jesus, the resurrection. You know. All that tired old dogma that poor ol Trib thinks Christians oughta believe to be considered Christians.

I walked in a prayer March last April (was on the media team) with 28,000 other believers through downtown Detroit. Believers from over 500 local churches with a whole range of theological backgrounds most of which were not mine. I sang with them, I prayed with them and I walked with them. Ya know what we ALL had in common?

The unshakable conviction that the bible is the infallible Word of the one true and living God who eternally exists in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That the first literal man Adam, created by the hand of God Himself, as our father and acting federal head plunged every last person born on this earth into eternal perdition by his disobedience to the unquestionable authority of his God. That the one and only remedy for this universal death in sin is the sinless life, blood sacrifice and literal bodily resurrection of the God/man Jesus of Nazareth “in whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily”. That the denial of these and a handful of other defining necessities was ipso facto a denial of God and His risen Christ and thereby a self condemning proclamation of ones anti Christian status.

That’s how it’s always been see. Until recently. Come on. Don’t be shy. I’ll respect you more, which I never ever said you should care about, but I will. If you just please, pretty please take a stand and own that you do not buy what I am sayin. I beg of thee. Please? No non committal “well I don’t like to look at things exactly that way”. Please? Just say it? The old time gospel of sin and holiness and all that crap has outlived it’s usefulness. We need new fresh perspectives to appeal to the modern man. Forget all that doctrine, just kissy kissy kissy love Jesus and it’s cool. Come on. Are you gonna deny that’s what you think.

You’ve already told me you hold that abhorrent equivalent of the roman doctrine of “invincible ignorance”, whereby people who’ve never heard of Jesus might be saved nonetheless. Shock of all shocks, Push says he holds that as well. Along with every other bible butchering liberal. If your PHD’s disagree with the above list they ARE NOT Christians and their views on the bible mean less than nothing. A lifetime of study minus surrender to God equals heightened judgement. If they say they agree. See what they think of that blasphemous Debbie Blue sermon. The woman you recruited to explain me to these unbelievers. I can explain myself thanks. I don’t need some God hating liberal to speak for me. She has zeeroh insight on anything.

I do not have to read her equally blasphemous book. Your Louie Simmons analogy IS crazy BTW, from a Christian perspective. This ain’t squatting man. Ya know what’s really funny? Quick Ben of all people. Who thinks I am a pathetic, deluded, fantasy chasing idiot will get this better than you seem to be. Come one Ben. How’s this sound? “well I sure don’t believe any of that crap, but I do see where he’s comin from. I mean it doesn’t seem unreasonable for there to be some definitions that come from the bible for people who are claiming to be Christians after all”. Is that close at all.

Instead of killing off the gospel into meaninglessness by a thousand qualifications, why don’t people just pick something else to claim to believe. I can suggest dozens. Here ya go, Ben likes Hinduism. Perfect. Then you don’t have to have a bible and 2000 years of universal testimony from the church buggin you all the time. Problem solved. You can believe whatever you want and leave Jesus out of it.

Where am I wrong?
[/quote]

You’re wrong in all of it and you are really starting to piss me off with your antics. You don’t know me, you assume you know what I am saying when in fact I am saying nothing of the sort. You put words in my mouth, make assumptions about me, my family, my friends, and my position. The art of dispassionate and rational discourse is truly dead, and I’ve now succumbed to getting pissed off in a bloody internet thread. This has got to be a new low for me. I don’t know how you did it, but you finally managed to get under my skin.

233

You’re just mad we got the cool nicknames.

234

[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< You’re wrong in all of it >>>[/quote]Example please[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< you assume you know what I am saying when in fact I am saying nothing of the sort. >>>[/quote] Then help me out [quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< You put words in my mouth, make assumptions about me, my family, my friends, and my position. >>>[/quote]Here’s what I’ve done. Like I say I am 100% certain all the time every time about the core of the Christian faith. That faith itself excludes every other version of itself from authenticity. You are telling us, best as I can decipher, because straight answers aren’t too forthcoming, that I am wrong. If so then you are espousing one of those other versions and by extension, so are the other people you mention if they agree with you. See, Ben will get that too.[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< I don’t know how you did it, but you finally managed to get under my skin.[/quote]That wasn’t my intention. My intention wasn’t even primarily about you. I would have no problem talking with your PHD friends. not that they should drop their lives and come here to talk with me, but I wouldn’t if they ever found themselves so inclined.[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< I prefer to be the observing scientist, thank-you-very-much :slight_smile: >>>[/quote] And see what Ben here understands is that in the Christian worldview, of which there can only be one, you ARE one of the three regardless of what you prefer. [quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< You have to realize I intentionally have tried to maintain a sort of observing debater’s perspective here. >>>[/quote]Stop it please. It’s disgusting. Take a bloomin stand on something will ya. You’re a liberal. No serious bible believing Christian could EVER recommend a worthless hack like Debbie Blue as a reliable source of information for understanding the gospel. And when you say you weren’t using her for that, but only for understanding guys like Chen and I it will speak volumes once more. [quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< you Ben still consider me a “nutbag believer” >>>[/quote]If this were true, you and I would be getting along just fine. Tell him what you really believe and see how long it takes him to conclude, if he hasn’t already that you’re a liberal. Tryin to be friends with his world. Friendship with the world is enmity with God.[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< Tirib has declared war on me for “not being saved” or something. >>>[/quote]Tirib has declared war on you for dishonoring the God you claim to serve by arrogantly adjusting his truth to your modernistic attitude and beliefs. Tell these fine people whether you believe in macro bio-evolution, pretty much the same way they do. Except… God did it.(this oughta be good) Let the semantic dancing begin.[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< I never once put “conversion” on my list of motives for the book suggestions. >>>[/quote]That’s not the freakin point. You put forward an abominable blasphemous hater of God’s truth, even in her position in senior leadership in that “church”, as an “insightful” source for understanding people who actually take the gospel seriously. The fact that you DO NOT get that is what is most telling of all to me[quote]Aragorn wrote:<<< Interestingly enough, I do my best to keep my “invested” conversations taking place primarily through PM. In Private. >>>[/quote]Why? Christians are commanded to declare the truth of the gospel of God in “whatever they do”. I am NEVER talking just to who I’m talking to. I am keenly aware of the view count much more than the post count. I love it when there’s 100 posts and 1400 views. I know there a couple dozen people who will never post in that thread, but are watching. As in my Jeremiah example. My job is to faithfully declare God’s Word without the slightest motivation coming from how anyone will respond. That’s not up to me.

Ben doesn’t think you’re a “nutjob believer”. He thinks you’re a watered down compromiser. If I could get you to answer some questions, which I doubt, and is further the point, he’d be convinced for sure. He’s obviously free to correct me anytime I’m wrong here BTW. Ya know what’s funny again. He, being a self professed total unbeliever in the gospel, gets this and you don’t! Put yourself in my position (or his). I’m the “nutjob believer” to him which this enemy of Christ actually respects. Why? Because I’m consistent. I don’t try n weave abuncha foreign modernistic anti-christian crap into my allegedly Christian beliefs.

You make me wrong about you and I hope you hear me good right now. It will be my GREAT joy and pleasure to publicly and loudly beg your forgiveness and tell the world how absolutely wrong I was. I would LOVE to do that. Because you and your relationship with God are infinitely more important to me than being right. Let God be true and every man a liar. I have a knot in my gut dealing with people like you. I would much rather stand in the house of the Lord with the saints, raise my hands and sing praises to my King. This is no fun for me. But I cannot help it.

235

A well tuned bullshit radar on a fundamentalist Christian.

lol, who’d a thunk it. Good post.

236

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
My parents are dying to talk to me about this “stuff”, as you put it. I avoid it because I have no desire to challenge their faith, or to drive any further wedges between us. Also I don’t know if you’ve clicked my profile, but I’m a grown man, 29 as it were.
[/quote]
I looked at your profile. I’m sure your parents would like to see some changes in the way you live. Jesus Christ would help you make those changes. He would also put in you the desire to change, which you don’t have now, as you are “dead in trespasses and sins.” (Eph 2:1)

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
If you don’t see the relevance of “the first will be last…” in relation to living your whole life “saved”, or being saved by coming to Christ late in life, I don’t know what to tell you. You’re the one arguing that parents who came to their faith late in life are more likely to have their children “fall.” Of course I would have to agree that the earlier you start ANY indoctrination, the better the chances of making it stick.[/quote]
How about if you don’t make me out to be a dunce just because I can’t follow your line of thought. When Jesus said the “first shall be last; and the last shall be first,” He was making a reference to how the world views people, their positions and accomplishments, and how God views them. In many cases, the views are directly opposed. I honestly can’t see your point about how this relates to my claim that raising your kids the bible way from the get go pretty much guarantees a consistent result. If you really want to discuss it, you’ll have to give it to me in a more fleshed out question.

It’s not ridiculous to speculate that Noah disobeyed God. He’s a sinner just like everyone else, so it’s completely possible. Also, there are other examples of great men in the bible who disobeyed God: Moses, King David, even the Apostle Paul. Ben, if you want to discuss the bible intelligently, you’re going to have to read it once.

It is a minor issue. Comparatively speaking, God just doesn’t have that much content about animals in the bible. God doesn’t cause you to be reborn as an animal. They are created to work for man, and feed him, and maybe some companionship. Treat them with compassion certainly, but feel free to eat any one you like. Dogmeat, horsemeat, goatmeat, snakemeat, monkeymeat, ratmeat, it’s all good. But there’s no need to have funerals for them. God doesn’t ask us to care that much. And He just forgot to mention dinosaurs I guess.

Oops. Leave of the very last (sentence) period.
Corrected: Is the Bible True? - Come Reason Ministries

And now I must hold your feet to the fire (bad humor I know). Is that you in your new avatar smoking in the library?

237

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
“You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe” -Dr. Carl Sagan
[/quote]
Typical bunk from Carl.

He has just as deep seated a need to believe as anyone else. A truly hypocritical statement. You’re impressed by it Bigflamer?

238

[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
A well tuned bullshit radar on a fundamentalist Christian.

lol, who’d a thunk it. Good post.[/quote]I was gonna wait until tomorrow because I’m dead tired.

I’ll never lie to you Ben. There’s a part of me remaining down in there that really loves to hear you say that. He will not be dead for good until this body of flesh gives up the ghost. It makes me sick to admit it.
However, the new man created in Christ Jesus unto good works that God prepared beforehand that I should walk in them (Ephesians 2) does not see this as a sport. Thanks be to the Lord, That new man is getting stronger all the time. I have no desire to be at odds with this man. Or anybody. You and he have no idea how much I don’t, though I think by now you may actually believe me.

239

[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:

He has just as deep seated a need to believe as anyone else. A truly hypocritical statement.
[/quote]

Please explain.

240

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:

Also, I cannot speak for other brands of “Christianity”. If you’re a Pentacostal wacko for example, I would expect your kids to reject such nonsense as soon as they are old enough to reason on their own. There are all kinds out their that claim the name of Christ, as we’ve gone over before. If you’re not going to fully follow the bible with reverence, humility, and diligent study, it’s anybody’s guess what results you’ll get with your kids.

[/quote]
Why do you consider Pentalcostal’s wackos?
[/quote]
This is a worthwhile question, so even though it’s a few pages back already, here ya go:

First, if you’re going to follow the bible in practice, then you need to put in a reasonable amount of time to study and learn what the bible says. A christian is commanded to “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2Ti 2:15) There are some practices peculiar to pentacostal “christianity” that are clearly nonsense, when you study the bible as it pertains to these particular practices.

Let’s take the most glaring pentacostal idiocy- “speaking in tongues” Youtube is blocked where I’m at, but I’m sure you could find a clip of such a church service. Kenneth Copeland, the TV megapreacher is big on this stuff. What are tongues in the bible really? In the Old Testament, the word tongue(s) appears 161 times and ALWAYS means- the slippery thing in your mouth, or a natural language that at least some people speak and understand, like English or Farsi. I speak two. When you plug this definition into the passages in the New Testament, it becomes very clear what is happening in Acts chapter 2 or 1Corinthians chapter 14 for example. The Pentacostals take verses from these passages out of their context, ignore how the bible has already defined tongues more than 100 times, and make up a practice where they blabber gibberish, and think it’s some kind of heavenly prayer language. It’s lunacy.

Conclusion: They are wackos.