A tendril of the growth nurtured in early Greek religion wound its way into Roman acceptance and flowered into the belief that gods had a language all their own. Deities did not communicate in the mundane speech of mortals, however. In his hymn to the gods, Hesiod, who lived in the eighth century b.c., described the multiheaded monster, Typhoeus, who besides bellowing, roaring, barking, and hissing, could also speak in a " 'normal' voice, ... [making] the same kind of noise as a human larynx does ... though the language he speaks is of course that of the gods."
By the time Plato developed his philosophy, it seems that the concept was unchanged. He, too, believed that the gods spoke a language that humans could not possibly comprehend. But a way had been provided for humans to understand their speech. Men from any linguistic background could speak the language of deities only if their minds were unhinged by the gods. Indeed, incoherent speech was viewed as a gift from the gods. Socrates explains in
Phaedrus, "The greatest blessings come by way of madness, indeed of madness that is heaven-sent." Plato reiterates this concept in the
Timaeus. In sound and reason, if the speaker was understood by his audience, it was proof he did not possess this gift of the gods.
Some Christians want to deny Paul's use of glossolalia in his doctrine, but it is there. (Jesus certainly never took up the subject.) In First Corinthians Paul teaches: "When a man is using the language of ecstasy he is talking with God, not with men, for no man understands him; he is no doubt inspired, but he speaks mysteries." Further on in this chapter, Paul declares: "Thank God, I am more gifted in ecstatic utterance than any of you." Being the clever man he was, however, Paul understood the ramifications of what he was teaching and attempted to control this branch of his gospel by pruning some of its wild growth. Therefore, he warned his followers, it is better to "speak five intelligible words ... than thousands of words in the language of ecstasy."
Even so, the precept remains a part of Paul's creed, and he goes on to follow Plato's pattern by insisting that interpreters be present when ecstatic utterances are part of a meeting. Here are Paul's instructions: "To sum up, my friends: when you meet to worship, each of you contributes a hymn, some instruction, a revelation, an ecstatic utterance, or the interpretation of such utterance." After unintelligible sounds were produced by a human voice, another person was called on to explain them to an audience of believers who had faith that God was using these noises to communicate with them.
Apparently, this idea, too, comes from the
Timaeus, where Plato gives these directions: "But, while [the enthralled one] continues demented, he cannot judge of the visions which he sees or the words which he utters; ... And for this reason it is customary to appoint interpreters to be judges of the true inspiration." Surely Paul's rules in First Corinthians are too similar to Plato's directions in the
Timaeus to be accidental. Yet whether a stand is being taken for or against glossolalia in Christianity, Paul's advice on the subject is used to support the argument.
A good example of what can happen in worship when the element of ecstasy takes over is described in I Samuel 19:18-24. During the time when Saul was hunting David to kill him, he commanded his soldiers to find and apprehend the former shepherd. While searching for David, however, the men came upon Samuel's school of prophets in Naioth and found his students enjoying a rapturous state. The king's men also "fell into prophetic rapture" and left off their search to join the prophets in their activities. When Saul's men failed to return with David, he sent two other bands to search for him, but they, too, fell into the spiritual abandonment led by Samuel.
Despairing at the failure of his men, Saul himself set off in pursuit of his former harp player. Upon arriving at Naioth, however, Saul also became possessed. He took off his clothes, and, naked and prone on the ground, "fell into a rapture before Samuel and lay" in that state for the rest of the day and all that night. The rapt Saul was no more successful than his men had been. Samuel Sandmel calls this group of Samuel's "loathsome whirling dervishes."
What Samuel incited his prophets to do was in direct disobedience to Yahweh, according to passages in Exodus. Encouraging His priests to spare Him the sight of their private parts, God instructed them in Exodus 28 to wear linen drawers. Surely this rule of covering oneself before God extends to prophets, since shedding one's sense of speech apparently leads to casting off other considerate social items as well.
Quoted from:
Saint Paul's Homage to Plato, by F.F. Powell
