Cults Are Fanatical

Although most Christians would at times be tempted to lie, cheat, steal, or commit immorality, perhaps most who are so tempted would not yield.  Yet many of these same people who would not yield to carnal temptation could be pushed to other extremes -- to devote long hours to a cause, weaken their ties to friends and families, or develop an elitist mentality whereby they view their group as more spiritual or more favoured by God than other groups.  What they don't realize is that pharisaical fanaticism and extremism are as destructive as the sins of the flesh.  

When I (Dr. Paul R. Martin) belonged to the Great Commission International, a man whom I will call John was also involved.  John became one of the leaders of our movement.  In the early days, some of the leaders and I had observed some problems with the movement, and we would talk openly and freely to John about these problems.  While John agreed with our analysis, he rationalized the team's problems away.  He said that we were young and still learning, that there was no spiritual "action" anywhere else, and that nobody else was doing what we were doing to reach the world.  Every other group seemed dead by comparison.  

In this way, John and countless others excuse excesses and errors of many kinds.  And they were often justified by means of Scripture taken out of context.  "Be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves" (Matthew 10:16) and "wisdom is proved right by her actions" (Matthew 11:19) were two of the most abused verses.

Other groups have protected their pastors from charges of immorality with similar reasoning.  "How could such a dynamic and spiritual soul-winner possibly be wrong?"  I know of pastors that justify their own sexual immorality because they "are not like other men," and that "God knows my special needs."  Some claim their sexual liaisons are the only way they can show the love of God to some of the women (or in some cases, men).  This is how cults and fringe churches justify their practices and excuse their leaders.

(from Cult Proofing Your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

False Teachings of Barrie Victory Centre from their Statement of Faith:

"Jesus Christ became sin and sickness, thus providing both salvation and healing for all mankind."  Scripture, properly interpreted, does not support this teaching.  Christ died for one reason and one reason alone; to pay the price for our sin.

"All believers are entitled to and should expect and earnestly seek the baptism in the Holy Spirit; according to the command of Jesus Christ...the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is found in speaking with other tongues..."  There is no scripture to support the belief that Christians should earnestly seek the baptism in the Holy Spirit or that Christians are commanded to speak in tongues.  Scripture has been grossly misinterpreted.  No command of this nature appears anywhere in Scripture.

"Total prosperity is available to every believer, spiritually, mentally, physically, financially and socially."  The Health and Wealth Gospel is man-made theology based on manipulation of Scripture but has nothing to do with Christianity.  

False Teaching By Omission:

"The Bible is the inspired Word of God and the revealed Will of God." Crucial words omitted from this belief are "and contain the complete revelation of God." The omission of these words means that Barrie Victory Centre believes in extra-biblical revelation which is one of the primary marks of a cult.

Glossolalia is learned, addictive behaviour.   Anybody can learn how to do it, including non-Christians.  Glossolalia has nothing to do with "other languages" that were used by God to communicate the Gospel in the early days of the church. Glossolalia is not tongues. 

"He is the same yesterday, today and forever" is falsely used by members of Barrie Victory Centre and Pentecostals in general to justify their practices of speaking in tongues, their belief in all kinds of healings and miracles.  The false teaching here is that this Scripture refers to Jesus' character, not to the things He did while here on earth.  This is total misuse of Scripture.

For complete information on the Faith Movement, which Barrie Victory Centre is involved in, you need to read "Christianity in Crisis 21st Century" by Hank Hanegraaff (available at www.equip.org). 

Cults Motivate Through Fear and Guilt

Why do we obey another?  Is it because we feel compelled, anxious, and fearful?  If so, we are headed for trouble.  Others can then motivate us by playing on our neuroses -- our anxieties, fears, and compulsions.

Cults demand obedience and motivate their victims by using fear and guilt.  In fact, some cults and fringe churches frequently teach that if members disobey and leave the group they will go to hell.  In some groups disobedient members are publicly ridiculed, and at times even publicly beaten.  Sometimes leaders teach that certain curses, diseases, or possibly demonic possession awaits those not fully compliant with the program of the church.

One young man was told after he left his fringe Pentecostal church that his negative influence would bring demonic attacks on his family.  Facing an impossible dilemma -- not wanting to return to the group's aberrant teaching but not wanting demonic attacks on his family -- he chose to kill himself, thinking that at least his family would be spared the demonic onslaught.  Driving deep into the woods, he parked his car and hiked into the remotest corners of the forest.  There he sat beside a tree and swallowed an entire bottled of sedatives.  Fortunately, he was rescued by a woodcutter who found him before it was too late.

This young man's story is not unique.  Suicide attempts occur on a fairly regular basis in the cults.  Even among those who have not contemplated suicide, I have yet to meet a single person who left a cultic group who denied that the group ruled through intimidation with fear and guilt.

In the first "honeymoon" phase of cultic involvement, members usually put in long and rigorous hours doing whatever the leader tells them is God's will.  Many of them work very hard and accomplish many things.  In some groups, it may be evangelism.  Members may start evangelizing early in the morning and work until long after dark doing things like passing out tracts, knocking on doors, selling literature, or striking up conversations with people in the park.  Communalistic "back-to-nature" groups may have their members spend long hours gardening, selling organic foods, or repairing farm equipment.  Full-time students who are active in the Boston Church of Christ movement, for example, typically average twenty to thirty-five hours per week in Bible study, Bible talks (evangelistic Bible studies), prayer, evangelism, and meeting with their senior partner who trains them.  It is common in a great many cults for male members to be pressed into service as "volunteer" maintenance workers, lawn care workers, chauffeurs, or anything else that is needed for the group leaders.  Female members often serve as unpaid baby-sitters, housekeepers, or cooks for the wives of the leadership.

No one should doubt that these groups generate a lot of "fruit" in the areas of numerical growth and financial gain.  But what type of fruit is that?  Is it genuine, or is it coerced out of fear and guilt?  How long will such fruit last?  Many members leave these groups because they feel they have failed, they can't stand the pace any longer.  They are spent, exhausted, confused, discouraged, and guilt-ridden.  Still others turn bitter.  A former member of Great Commission International told me that because of spiritual burnout due to his activity with GCI, he will not even set foot in a church.  Burnout, fear, and guilt can wreck lives.

Fear and guilt are negative emotions.  they can produce tremendous (but temporary) results for religious organizations by way of adding new members, encouraging long hours of work for the "cause," and increasing the wealth and power of the group.  Motivation by fear and guilt can solve problems quickly.  But they should never be motivations to complete a task and accomplish a mission.

Of course, fear and guilt are neither good nor evil in and of themselves.  They are feelings that cannot be denied.  But we can't live on them.  Fear and guilt are like flashing red lights telling us that something is wrong.  The lights say there is trouble, so find the problem and fix it.

(from Cult Proofing Your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

Cults Require Submission to Authority

Cults demand dependency and call it biblical submission.  In reaction to this false concept of submission, people throw out the concept of true submission altogether -- because it is wrongly viewed as unhealthy, crippling, and psychologically enslaving.  Sadly, that is what many do experience when they subscribe to the cultic type of submission -- unhealthy, crippling, psychological dependency.

In cultic submission, there is little or no opportunity for self expression.  Assertiveness, initiative, questioning, and expressing feelings of individuality are strictly forbidden or severely discouraged.  In cultic submission, people fear rejection, crave approval, need constant reassurance and advice from their leaders, and panic when they fear they have displeased them.

Cult "submission" is dependency -- not submission.  What is healthy submission?  In biblical submission there is no denial of one's personality, thoughts, feelings, or expressions.  To "deny self" does not mean to deny one's personhood.  We are to deny the selfish, sinful, hurtful qualities of the self, but certainly not our personhood.  We submit because we want to serve another person, or facilitate a certain ministry.  After all, Christ was in submission to His disciples -- He served them constantly.

Paul, an apostle who submitted to the Lord and to the brethren, did not hesitate to confront Peter for his hypocrisy in refusing to eat with the Gentiles (Galations 2:11-14).  Neither did godly women of Scripture hesitate speaking their minds when the situation required.  Caleb's daughter requested that she receive an inheritance not only of land, but of springs as well (Joshua 15:19).  Sarah protested the continued presence of Hagar and her son.  This was not being unsubmissive, because God told Abraham that he should listen to Sarah and send Hagar and the boy away (Genesis 21:8-21).  Abigail completely overrode her husband Nabal, after he refused to offer food and supplies to David's army, by providing the necessary provisions to David's army.  This prevented David from taking moral vengeance against Nabal.  David thanked God for Abigail's generosity, and praised her wisdom (1 Samuel 25:9-38).

In biblical submission, we may have to give of our time, talents, and energy to please and serve others, but not to our own detriment.  I submit to my employer in performing my job as instructed.  But I will not submit to attempts to label me and define my existence.  I will not allow anyone to tell me what I should or should not feel.  I obey when asked to do something in line with my job responsibilities, but I am not obligated to submit to that which is wrong.

As a faithful Christian and a serious church member, there are times when I voluntarily submit.  However, the authority of church leaders lies mainly in the area of faith and morals.  Beyond the responsibility of instruction concerning correct doctrine and the promotion of moral behaviour,  church leaders cannot rightfully expect submission beyond the clear teaching of Scripture.  There are many secondary points of doctrine in which the church has always been undecided (the method of baptism, the role of women in the church and the home, the form of worship, etc.).  On such points pastors and others are free to give their opinions and conclusions, but apart from clear and unambiguous Scriptural teaching, no one has the authority to compel acceptance of their personal views.

This applies also to matters of behaviour or lifestyle.  When the Scripture is silent, leaders may not legislate.  They may direct members to biblical principles, and suggest ways to apply these principles to specific situations but they must leave the final decision as a matter between an individual and God.  In the second chapter of Colossians, Paul clearly teaches that Christians should not obey their leaders on matters unrelated to the Gospel, or on things that are actually a distortion of the Gospel itself.  In that context, the prescription to observe certain days, to eat or to abstain from certain foods, or to take special note of leaders boasting of visions or delighting in certain types of self-abasement was to be avoided.  Paul's implication for us is clear -- honouring leaders has its limits, and the responsibility for discerning truth is never taken away from the individual Christian.  We are to evaluate all things in the light of what we know to be truth -- the Gospel as originally taught by the apostles and as we find it in the New Testament.

Nor am I obligated to submit by remaining silent if my pastor sins.  Paul tells us in the first chapter of Galatians never to submit to anyone who teaches or practices error.  Paul himself refused to sit by while so-called spiritual leaders behaved hypocritically (Galatians 2:11-14).  In fact, a true sign of my submission to my pastor will be that I do confront him or her when they are wrong, and continue to follow correct biblical guidelines in confronting him until there is a change of behaviour.

One last word about submission.  The entire concept of submission must be understood in the context of Christian grace and freedom.  If submission to another does not result in increased grace and freedom, then it is not biblical submission.  It is dependency and tyranny.

(from Cult Proofing Your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

Cults Do Not Allow Questioning

True leadership allows questions, and even recognizes the importance of disputes on occasion. One of the prime hallmarks of cults or other groups with cultic tendencies is the condemning of questioning.

A friend commented recently on how upset she was on seeing a bumper sticker that read "Question Authority." Like so many other evangelicals, she saw questioning authority as a sign of anarchy, disrespect, and rebellion. However, the Bible not only permits the questioning of authority, but it also says it is every Christian's responsibility to question authority. For example:

• Paul chides the believers in Colosse for not questioning their leaders. He writes, "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ" (Colossians 2:8). He adds "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day," (Colossians 2:16). He tells the Colossians, "Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize" (Colossians 2:18).
• The Bereans were commended because they didn't just blindly accept Paul's interpretation of the Scriptures. As Luke put it, "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true" (Acts 17:11).

In contrast to this spirit, cultism thrives in the belief that questioning authority is sin. But questions can represent a legitimate inquisitive and analytical mind. If only the people had been allowed to question Jim Jones long before they drank the poisoned beverage. It is not questioning itself that reflects rebellion, as almost all cultists teach, but the attitude of the questioner that may indicate defiance of authority.

(from Cult Proofing Your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

The Grand Poo-Bah says: If you attend Barrie Victory Centre, you need to check out my blog dated Friday, February 20, 2009. After you have read it, I would assume that you would have some questions to ask Mr. & Mrs. McCulloch about what they teach at your church. Good luck with that! Barrie Victory Centre is a cult and questioning will not be tolerated, I guarantee it.

You also need to be aware that if you accuse them of not allowing questioning, they will allow a few questions strictly for the purpose of debunking that charge. But what you will really find is that if you question too much, too long, or too hard, your questioning will be frowned upon or you will be told that you can lose your salvation for asking so many questions. You are supposed to just "trust" them unquestioningly. Try it and see what happens! You will get shot down so fast you will not believe it. To attend Barrie Victory Centre, you have to be an automaton with absolutely no individual thinking skills.

Cults Manipulate People

The key to all recruitment by any cult lies in how they manipulate people. Take a look at these definitions of manipulators:

• Manipulators exploit and/or control themselves as things in self-defeating ways.
• Manipulators "attempt to get someone else to provide for [them] what [they] refuse to provide for [themselves]."
• Manipulators "cannot and will not be happy, ever, even if you sacrifice your mind, heart, and body for them because they will always be left with an empty lonely person inside themselves."
• The hallmark of the manipulator is to be demanding rather than being aware: the aggressive manipulator demands; the loving manipulator cajoles; the weakling manipulator needs; the strong manipulator overpowers.
• Manipulators are "numb automatons, wasting hours trying to recapture the past or ensure the future. They talk about their feelings but are rarely in vital contact with them."
• Manipulators habitually conceal and "camouflage real feeling behind a repertoire of behaviours that run the scale from servile flattery to arrogant hostility to withdrawn snobbishness in the continuous campaign to serve his or her own wishes or unconscious needs."
• Manipulators don't allow you to confront them with your true ideas or emotions. Manipulators cannot let you get mad at them, nor can they let you "get inside" them, close to any of their true, though hidden, emotions.
• Manipulators "fear vulnerability, fear being exposed or judged. They are afraid that sustained contact with another will reveal a dimension of themselves that they have so far denied or refused to see...the manipulator chooses to avoid risk by attempting to control those around him or her."
• Manipulators tend to want to control everything, including the conversations of other people. "They evaluate rather than appreciate [...they] try to convince others, rather than exchange ideas with others. They limit themselves to safe 'small talk.'"
• Past events -- real or imagined -- give manipulators excuses for failure. Many manipulators base their promises on the future. Present-oriented manipulators "talk a lot about what they are doing and may seem to be busy, but in fact they seldom accomplish much of anything."

In order to be manipulated one must surrender control to a degree. How does this happen? First, manipulators appeal to one's needs, wants, desires, and weaknesses. They offer something that seems to satisfy.

Second, manipulators base their appeal more on emotion than logic. People today seem to be more persuaded by the dynamics of delivery rather than the content of a message. Harold Bussell noted that students at Gordon College were more enamoured by a powerful delivery than by the content of a chapel speaker's message. Students almost invariably requested certain chapel speakers be invited back if they were dynamic speakers. Content or substance had little to do with their requests. Unless we become more interested in logic than in emotion, we will be manipulated endlessly by the "package" of the message.

Third, manipulators have learned how to operate as successfully in destructive cults as in consumer fraud scams. Cultists operate like the slick used-car salesman. Snake oil potions of old have been repackaged into the new elixirs of spiritual vitality and physical well-being. Throughout history humankind has fallen prey to easy answers, quick fixes, and great bargains.

(from Cult Proofing Your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

Spotting A Cult

As a child, Jane attended a Hebrew school, where she learned all about cults. She was taught how cults recruit new members: by "love bombing," by offering free meals, by "weekend retreats," and by using front organizations that pose as some youth service ministry. She also learned about specific cults like the Moonies, the Scientologists, and the Children of God.

Jane felt prepared for an encounter with a cult. In fact, she had actually received one of the best cult prevention programs available to anyone in a school setting. Yet all Jane's cult education was to no avail, for she joined the Church Universal and Triumphant after having been recruited by a close friend. Later she realized her mistake and came to Wellspring to recover from her involvement with this cult.

How could Jane, of all people, find herself in a cult? This young woman did not realize that cults recruit in a variety of ways. Nor did she realize that even the best books on cults leave out hundreds, if not thousands, of other groups that are cultic in nature. Instead, Jane reasoned, "If it isn't a Moonie or a Way member, or a Scientologist, then I'm not being 'love bombed.' I am not being pressured to attend any special meetings, so it must not be a cult."

Surface Appearances

No one has ever shopped around to join a cult. No one has ever deliberately sought out an organization where they could be manipulated economically, physically, and emotionally. Yet each day, people are lured into cults and fringe groups that promise one thing and deliver another.

How, then, can you spot a cult? How can you get past the initial or surface appearances presented by cults to find out their inner mechanisms? One way is to recognize the chief characteristics of cults.

Your Child Could be Lured into a Cult

NO MATTER HOW SPIRITUAL YOU ARE, NO MATTER HOW STRONG YOUR FAMILY, you could lose your child to the siren call of the cults.

Time and time again, Dr. Paul Martin has seen dedicated Christian young people fall into the trap of cults and fringe churches. Himself a victim of a cultic fringe church, Dr. Martin now reaches out to other former cult members, assisting hundreds of them to find healing.

Now Dr. Martin shares his expertise in the first book about cults designed especially for concerned Christian parents. In Cult-Proofing Your Kids, he advises parents on:

• how to identify a cult
• how to educate children about cults
• why people join cults
• what to do when your child joins a cult
• how to help your child recover from cult involvement

There is nothing more heartbreaking than losing your child to a cult. But with Cult-Proofing Your Kids, you now have the tools you need to prevent that from happening -- or to fight back when it does.

"A very practical tool for parents, counsellors, youth leaders, and anyone else concerned about the potential dangers lurking in today's spiritual supermarket." Ronald Enroth, Westmount College, author of Churches That Abuse.

Paul R. Martin, Ph.D., a licensed psychologist, directs the Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center in Ohio, a counselling center for former cultists. He also serves on the Board of Directors for the Cult Awareness Network and is an advisory board member for the American Family Foundation.

(from Cult Proofing your Kids by Dr. Paul R. Martin)

Why Are Tongues So Popular?

Charismatic teachers and writers claim that speaking in tongues is the work of the Holy Spirit, that it is a sweeping new burst of power that has come upon the church in the last days.

How can that be? The tongues being spoken today are not biblical. Those who speak in tongues are not practicing the gift described in Scripture. Then why do so many pursue this practice with such fervor? Why do they seek to convince and intimidate others to start doing the same thing? A basic reason is spiritual hunger. People hear that tongues is a way to have a wonderful spiritual experience. They fear that if they have not spoken in tongues, they may be missing something. They want "something more."

Also, many people are hungry to express themselves spiritually. They have been coming to church for years but they really have not been involved. They have not been recognized as particularly spiritual or holy; and because they hear that tongues-speakers are thought to be holy and spiritual, they try it.

Another basic reason for the growth of tongues is the need for acceptance and security. People need to be in the "in group." They want to be among the ones who "have it," and they cringe at the thought of being among the have-nots who are on the outside looking in. It is very satisfying for some to be in the charismatic movement. It is a form of self-actualization to be able to say, "I am a charismatic." It makes many people feel that they are somebody, like they belong to something, like they have something others do not have.

Another explanation is that the charismatic movement is a reaction to the secularized, mechanized, academic, cold, indifferent society in which we live. The tongues-speaker feels like he or she is directly in touch with the supernatural. Here is something tangible that they can experience. This is not dry and academic. It feels real!

Probably the key reason tongues have exploded on the scene with such force is the need for an alternative to the cold, lifeless Christianity that permeates so many churches. People who join the charismatic movement often are those who are looking for action, excitement, warmth, and love. They want to believe that God is really at work in their lives -- right here and now. Dead orthodoxy can never satisfy, and that is why many people look for satisfaction in the charismatic movement.

Some might say "Why criticize them?" We do so because it is scriptural to be concerned about whether our brothers and sisters are walking in the truth. Although it may not seem very loving to some, the Bible is clear that we are to "speak the truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15). True love must act on the truth.

(from Charismatic Chaos by John F. MacArthur, Jr.)

Tongues Can Be Psychologically Induced

Some of the strangest cases of tongues have been explained as psychological aberrations. The tongues-speaker goes into motor automatism, which is clinically described as radical inward detachment from one's conscious surroundings. Motor automatism results in disassociation of nearly all voluntary muscles from conscious control.

Have you ever watched a newscast that showed young teenage girls at a rock concert? In the excitement and emotion, the fervor and the noise, they literally give up voluntary control of their vocal cords and their muscles. They fall to the floor in a paroxysm.

Most people, at one time or another, experience moments when they feel a little detached, a little woozy, and a little faint. Given the right set of conditions, particularly where there is a great deal of emotional fervor involved, a person can easily slip into a state where he or she is no longer consciously in control. In such a state, glossololia can be the result.

The condition in which most people sense the euphoria of the tongues experience seems to be closely related to the hypnotic state. Kildahl and Qualben stated from their studies that "hypnotizability constitutes the sine qua non of the glossolalia experience. If one can be hypnotized then one is able under proper conditions to speak in tongues."

After extensive study of tongues-speakers, Kildahl and Qualben concluded that people who were submissive, suggestible, and dependent on a leader were those most likely to speak in tongues. William Samarin agreed that "people of a certain type are attracted to the kind of religion that uses tongues." Obviously, not every tongues-speaker would fit into this category, but many if not most of them do. Watch almost any charismatic program on television, the people in the audiences nod and amen everything that is said from the platform, even novel and bizarre teachings. They submit easily to the power of suggestion and do whatever is being suggested. When emotions get high and the pressure mounts, anything might happen.

There is no way to analyze each speaker in tongues and come up with a clear reason for his behaviour. But as we saw, there are many possible explanations for the glossolalia among modern charismatics. Dr. E. Mansell Pattison, a member of the Christian Association for Psychological Studies, said:

The product of our analysis is the demonstration of the very natural mechanisms which produce glossolalia. As a psychological phenomenon glossolalia is easy to produce and readily understandable.

I can add my own observations from clinical experiences with neurological and psychiatric patients. In certain types of brain disorders resulting from strokes, brain tumors, etc. the patient is left with disruptions in his automatic, physical speech circuit patterns. If we study these "aphasic" patients we can observe the same decomposition of speech that occurs in glossolalia. Similar decomposition of speech occurs in schizophrenic thought and speech patterns, which is structurally the same as glossolalia.
This data can be understood to demonstrate that the same stereotypes of speech will result whenever conscious, willful control of speech is interfered with, whether by injury to the brain, by psychosis, or by passive renunciation of willful control.

As we have seen, would be tongues-speakers are often explicitly instructed to enter into "passive renunciation of willful control." They are told to release themselves, give up control of their voice. They are coached to say a few syllables, just to let them flow. They are not to think about what they are saying.

Charles Smith, the late Dean of The Master's Seminary, offered an entire chapter of possible explanations for the modern tongues phenomenon. He suggested that tongues can be produced by "motor automatism," "ecstasy," "hypnosis," "psychic catharsis," "collective psyche," or "memory excitation." The point is that tongues can have many explanations. One cannot escape the conclusion that tongues exist today in many counterfeit forms, apart from the Holy Spirit, just as they did in first-century Corinth.

(from Charismatic Chaos by John E. MacArthur, Jr.)

The Grand Poo-Bah says: 'Within the charismatic movement, there is great peer pressure to belong, to perform, to have the same gifts and power that everyone else has.' This seems to define the Pentecostal movement in a nutshell. If you are searching for peace of mind, you will not find it in the Pentecostal church. Something to think about!

Scripture says "The truth shall make you free." My Christian experience has been exactly that! Free from the condemnation of sin; free from pressure to perform or display phony power or gifts. Free from the law, "O happy condition," no pressure to do this or that. "Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe." My faith gives me total peace of mind. It doesn't do that for Pentecostals. They seem to be going from one experience to another experience. The next experience must be greater than the last.

If you are Pentecostal, you are likely very self-centered. Pentecostalism is all about "me" not about Him. If you're not chasing a new experience, you are going from one tongue-speaking to another tongue-speaking, all in an effort to impress a leader, peer group or serve your own personal agenda. You never seem to have any peace of mind whatsoever about your faith. You seem to be constantly striving after something when God has provided everything that you need. Pentecostals just don't get it!

We are saved to FREEDOM! Christ died to make us FREE, not to be slaves to this nonsense.

The Gospel is simple and easy to understand for a reason; so that a little child can understand it. Pentecostals seem to want to make it complicated when it is not. This is the problem the world has with Christianity. They think it's too easy and that there should be more to it.

("Pentecostal" refers to any church where there is "speaking in tongues.")

Tongues Is Learned Behaviour

Another possibility which could explain the phenomenon is that tongues is a learned behaviour. Most contemporary glossolalia, I am convinced, falls into this category. As we have seen, charismatic leaders like Charles and Frances Hunter hold seminars to instruct people about how to receive the gift of tongues. How can that be viewed as anything other than learned behaviour? The Hunters jump start people emotionally by getting them to shout prayers and praise; they suggest sample syllables to prime the pump; and they encourage people to repeat "funny little sounds." That's clearly not how a spontaneous gift operates. Nor is that kind of tongue-speaking by any stretch of the term a "supernatural" experience. It is not a miracle. It is something almost anyone can learn to do. It is striking that many of the different tongues-speakers use the same terms and sounds. They all speak essentially the same way. Anyone who hears it enough can do it.

In his book The Psychology of Speaking in Tongues, John Kildahl concluded after much study of the evidence that glossolalia is a learned skill. Kildahl, a clinical psychologist, and his partner Paul Qualben, a psychiatrist, were commissioned by the American Lutheran Church and the National Institute of Mental Health to do a long-range study on tongues. After all their work, they came to the firm conviction that it was nothing more than a "learned phenomenon".

A more recent study conducted at Carleton University, Ottawa, demonstrated that virtually anyone can learn to speak in tongues with minimum instruction and modeling. Sixty subjects who had never spoken in tongues or heard anyone else do it were used in an experiment. After two brief training sessions including audio and video taped samples of tongues speaking, all the subjects were asked to attempt to speak glossolalia for thirty seconds. Every subject in the test was able to speak passable glossolalia throughout the thirty-second test, and seventy percent were able to speak fluently.

A man in our church who used to speak in tongues admitted to me, "I learned to do it. I'll show you." Then he started speaking in tongues. The sounds I heard coming from him were exactly like other tongues I had heard from others. Yet the claim is constantly made that each charismatic is supposed to receive his own "private" prayer language.

I overheard a zealous charismatic trying to teach a new believer to speak in tongues. It struck me as odd that this man felt he needed to labour industriously to help this baby Christian receive the gift of tongues. Why a person would have to learn how to receive a gift from the Holy Spirit is baffling. None the less the charismatic movement is full of people who will gladly "teach" you how to speak in tongues.

While researching for this book, I was watching a charismatic talk show on television. One person confessed to having spiritual problems. Another charismatic said to him, "Have you used your tongue every day? Have you spoken in your language every day?"

"Well, no, I haven't," the person admitted.

To which the other one replied, "Well, that's your problem. You have to get into it every day, and it doesn't matter how it starts. Just get it started and once you get it started, the Holy Spirit will keep it going."

That conversation is revealing on several counts. For one, if the Holy Spirit has given someone the gift of tongues, why does that person have to make an effort to get it started?

Within the charismatic movement, there is great peer pressure to belong, to perform, to have the same gifts and power that everyone else has. The "answer" to spiritual problems is tongues. It is easy to see why tongues has become the great common denominator, the universal test of spirituality, orthodoxy, and maturity for charismatics. But it is a faulty test.

Kildahl and Qualben wrote,

Our study produced conclusive evidence that the benefits reported by tongues-speakers which are subjectively real and continuous are dependent upon acceptance by the leader and other members of the group rather than upon the actual experience of saying the sounds. Whenever a tongue-speaker broke off the relationship with the leader of the group, or felt rejected by the group, the experience of glossolalia was no longer so subjectively meaningful.

They also reported a wide-spread disillusionment among the subjects of their studies. People who spoke in tongues realized instinctively that what they were doing was learned behaviour. There was nothing supernatural about it. Soon they found themselves facing the same problems and hang-ups they had always had. According to Kildahl and Qualben, the more sincere a person was when starting to speak in tongues, the more disillusioned he could be when he stopped.

(from Charismatic Chaos by John F. MacArthur, Jr.)

The Grand Poo-Bah says:

The dangerous part of speaking in tongues is that it is addictive and very difficult to give up.