WT Experiences from the distant past presented as current

by blondie 15 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  blondie

  w63 6/1 p. 344 Is Speaking in Tongues an Evidence of True Worship? ***

  Those who seek these miraculous gifts that God no longer bestows upon his people lend themselves to such deception by Satan, and often the effects are embarrassing. Aside from the convulsive seizures and emotional shouting, D. A. Hayes in his book The Gift of Tongues described an incident similar to those reported by others. "At Los Angeles not long ago," he wrote, "a woman had the gift of tongues, and a reputable Chinaman who heard her said that she was speaking his dialect of Chinese. When he was asked to interpret what she said, he refused to do it, saying that the language was the vilest of the vile."

  And from Pastor Russell's Sermons printed in 1917

  On the contrary our experiences corroborate the declaration of St. Paul, that the operation of the holy Spirit of God in our hearts and minds has been favorable to the development of greater soundness of mind, by reason of our heed to the Word and its wisdom, which cometh from above. A WATCH TOWER reader in Los Angeles, Cal., writes that a neighbor woman got this so-called gift of tongues, and that a reputable Chinaman hearing her said that he understood her quite well--that she spoke his dialect of Chinese. Pressed for an interpretation he declined, saying that the utterance was the vilest of the vile.

  http://www.divineplan.org/htdbv5/r3940b.htm
• 

  stillajwexelder

  well all the literature is recycled Blonide so why not the experiences
• 

  Leolaia

  I looked up the Hayes reference, and the book is quite old:

  DA Hayes, The Gift of Tongues (New York: Methodist Book Concern, 1913).

  But what is interesting is that the experience from Pastor Russell's Sermons attributes the story to a WATCH TOWER reader. So was the ZWT the source used by Hayes? Or was the Hayes book used in the ZWT? Well, a search on the ctrussell.us site showed the source as follows:

  ***ZWT, 15 February 1907, p. 52***

  It is quite true that there was confusion at Pentecost, caused by so many speaking at once in foreign languages; but nothing in the record implies insanity or fanaticism: nor could we expect either of such sound logicians as the apostolic epistles show them to have been. On the contrary our experiences corroborate the declaration of St. Paul, that the operation of the holy Spirit of God in our hearts and minds has been favorable to the development of greater soundness of mind, by reason of our heed to the Word and its wisdom, which cometh from above. A WATCH TOWER reader in Los Angeles, Cal., writes that a neighbor woman got this so-called gift of tongues, and that a reputable Chinaman hearing her said that he understood her quite well--that she spoke his dialect of Chinese. Pressed for an interpretation he declined, saying that the utterance was the vilest of the vile.

  So does this mean that this experience originated in the Watch Tower, then was cited by a Methodist author in his own book, and then the Watchtower quotes this book as if the story was from an independent source -- but actually originating in the Watch Tower itself? This would be like the infamous quoting of the Italian article on earthquakes which itself utilized claims made by the WTS.
• 

  blondie

  Even more deceptive, Leoila.

  Well, still, the experience happend no later than 1917 was presented in 1963 as happening At Los Angeles not long ago," Lee's source shows 1907. I guess the WTS has an interesting view of what is not long ago, 46 or 56 years ago, no long ago.
• 

  Leolaia

  In fact, they again re-used the same experience in a 1974 Awake!

  ***

  g74 12/22 p. 28 What Does Speaking in Tongues Signify? ***

  In other words, speaking in tongues among Christians originally served to edify the listeners with information about God’s purpose in connection with Jesus Christ. In harmony with this, the apostle Paul directed that all speaking in tongues be translated, "that the congregation may receive upbuilding." (1 Cor. 14:5, 27, 28) But today’s tongue speaking, if it can be translated at all, often means simply "God is great," "God is good," or like expressions. On occasion even filthy speech may occur. D. A. Hayes, in his book The Gift of Tongues, relates such an experience:

  "At Los Angeles not long ago a woman had the gift of tongues, and a reputable Chinaman who heard her said that she was speaking his dialect of Chinese. When he was asked to interpret what she said, he refused to do it, saying that the language was the vilest of the vile."

  Certainly God could not be responsible for "vile" speech. What, then, is behind tongue speaking that does not conform to the Biblical pattern? It is noteworthy that the apostle Paul spoke of a coming "apostasy" from true Christianity and the appearance of a class called "the man of lawlessness," whose presence would be "according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing." (2 Thess. 2:3, 9, 10) Could tongue speaking be part of an "unrighteous deception" promoted by Satan?
• 

  stillajwexelder

  I guess the WTS has an interesting view of what is not long ago

  Yes they said not long to go now (before the Big A) back in 1982 to me. So 23 years is a short time to them
• 

  Leolaia

  LOL!!! They even used this old chestnut in 1992!

  ***

  w92 8/15 pp. 5-6 Is the Gift of Tongues Part of True Christianity? ***

  D. A. Hayes, in his book The Gift of Tongues, referred to an instance where a man refused to interpret the speech of a woman who spoke in an unknown tongue because "the language was the vilest of the vile." What a contrast that is to the speaking in tongues that existed in the first century and that was actually for building up the congregation!—1 Corinthians 14:4-6, 12, 18.
• 

  thom

  Isn't the part: "At Los Angeles not long ago," part of the quote from the book dated 1913? The way I read it, it's saying "not long ago" from DA Hayes viewpoint in 1913, not from the date the WT was published.
  Or did I misread that?
• 

  Leolaia

  Yes, when Hayes published his book, the original story appeared only 6 years earlier (at least; I suspect the story is an older urban legend, but I haven't found any other attestation). However, the Society does nothing to indicate how old Hayes' book is. They quoted it twice in the 1960s and 1970s, and without indicating how old the book is, the words "not long ago" thus wrongly lead the reader to believe that these are recent events in the post-war period. And it is amazing how the Society still quotes this book as recent as the 1990s, again without indicating how old it is -- or even that the story originated in the very pages of the Watch Tower.
• 

  blondie

  Except that the 1963 quote had no mention of Hayves