LetterToJimmySwaggart

From Scratchpad

Dear brothers Larsen, Donnie, Swaggart and Roy

Since you speak in 'tongues' in public I have to rebuke you in public. You are not speaking in tongues but merely chanting a small vocabularly of words in a loop. The people you prayed for who then "fell out in the Spirit" you actually unwittingly hypnotised. They did not receive the Holy Spirit since they can't speak a language with over 5000 words than one can look up on Google. You will be judged by the Lord Jesus for this deception on your part, even though you did this with the utmost sincerest of intentions. In no way do I lump you with the false prophets like Benny Hinny, Hagin or Copeland. But I am saying that you should talk to a stage hypnotist who can also make people fall down.

But hypnotists usually have some sort of state license and therefore won't inflict mental harm on Christians by making them think falling out unconscious was the Holy Spirit. Yet they can easily do the same thing Benny Hinn does.

Benny Hinn is engaging in mental health malpractise by slaying people. And so did you brother Swaggart .... so did you .... TongueSpeaker 07:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is Copeland speaking in tongues?

Ofcourse not. Yet you have made half-hearted attempts at calling your previous friend a false prophet. And I believe you have difficutly reconciling his "tongues" with his doctrine of devils. Because you are deceiving yourself in thinking that you can speak in tongues.

If Copeland is a false prophet then obviously he must be speaking false tongues. You brother Swaggart are not a false prophet for the message of the cross is the correct message: Only the blood of Jesus will save. (I don't agree with everything you say though but about 99%).

Copelands tongues is a fundamental omission in your critisism of him. If you were to say that his tongues is "nonsense" - which it is - then ofcourse people can point to you and say you are also making meaningless babble sounds.

If one deceives oneself on the issue of tongues it does not mean that everything that preacher says is wrong. I can listen to your teaching and just pray that the Lord opens your eyes to the plain and simple fact that neither you nor Donny, nor Larson or Roy can speak in tongues. And if you insist you can then you must provide me with a falsification test - some scientific way of disproving it.

You can't have this both ways. By implication calling Copeland "false" means his tongues obviously has to be false. But Copelands tongues are nonsense based purely on an unbiased scientific linguistic analysis. The linguist analysing it doesn't even have to know who Kenneth Copeland is.