Dr Anthony Aidoo, the Vice Chancellor of the Ideological Institute of Political
Incorrectness and Acute Uncouthness, has thrown the whole of Ghanainto another
furore mounting his foul-mouthed behaviour onto another notch. Unlike in the
past when his ill-mannered conduct has touched just the New Patriotic Party and
hence garnering the support of the National Democratic Congress and its
henchmen, this time; he has pulled off the reprehensible blunder of taking on
Christendom, a group with which Professor Mills, his superior, wants to be
associated—the raison d'être of Prophet T B Joshua being employed full time at
the Castle much to the exasperation of Dr Rawlings.
Dr Aidoo may not have been the only person to damn the art and act of “speaking
in tongues”. But perhaps, the good doctor has become a despicable article of
loathing because his reputation precedes him. It is a branded reality that Dr
Aidoo, the undeniable king of loose talks, wild vituperations and severe bad
manners, always calls into unspeakable probing, his standing as an academician
and as a former minister of state to the chagrin of even his so-called
associates. Glossolalia or speaking in tongues—if you like— has become an
extremely contentious issue in Christianity. But Dr Aidoo’s description of
tongues-speakers as lunatics and Lucifer-adorers has hit below the belt. Yet, we
have also witnessed the uncanny situation of a group of men and women seen at
night on various pitches mimicking sounds like the animal kingdom was in
disarray: they were croaking, neighing, bleating, mooing, etc with all the
fervour they could convene. Without impropriety and prejudice, we would want to
believe that this group was exercising their vocal cords in accordance with the
dictates of the Holy Spirit!
Nevertheless, as the whole of Ghanadescends mercilessly upon Dr Aidoo—and
justifiably so, we would like to draw further attention to one Reverend Xola
Skosana from South Africa. What the dickens does this Reverend have to do with
Dr Anthony Aidoo? Well, we can say on authority that if he were in Ghana, he
would be hanged for making various libellous remarks about Jesus Christ, the
Saviour. In the frenzy and grit to please HIV-AIDS activists, Reverend Skosana
affirms—we cannot say upon which empirical evidence he made his
pronouncement—that the Christ was HIV positive. Many hard-core Christians have
described Reverend Skosana’s declaration as blasphemous. On the subject of
so-called men of God behaving like the Antichrist, we will share a few thoughts
later. But we believe that his utterance is likely to earn him a well-deserved
summons before the World Council of Churches in the same way that Galileo faced
the wrath of the Roman Inquisition.
From our research and surveys from various Christian groupings, we gather the
courage to remark that glossolalia is indeed a very litigious matter in
Christianity. We have spoken to the Mormons (some people call them the Morons),
the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Catholics and the
Pentecostals, and have found a lot of contradictory views on the topic of
glossolalia. It is therefore obvious from our research and survey that if the
good doctor had dressed his language with a few metaphors, there would have been
no need for the acerbic discussions which have attended his rants to the effect
that glossolaliasts are people either teetering on the brink of psychosis or are
at worst, devil-worshippers. We do not condone his foul language but we mean to
say that he could have expressed his differing opinions on the topic without
condescending to diatribes and a blatant call of tongues-believers to a slanging
match. The problem with Dr Anthony Aidoo, as we are all aware, is his incapacity
to adhere to the simplest rule of political correctness. But in his usual
gaffes, Dr Aidoo has incensed most Christians—especially the Pentecostals by
trivialising their tongues-speaking feat, a notion which is almost the bedrock
of their faith.
Glossolalia, which is the flowing vocalisation of speech-like syllables, has
been thought of by a lot of people as meaningless but others believe it as a
holy language. The Azusa Revival of 1906 and the subsequent growth of the
Pentecostal Movement brought glossolalia into prominence. In the search for the
likely causes of speaking in tongues, the first person to throw glossolalia into
disrepute was one George Cutten in 1927 who claimed tongues-speakers were people
with low mental abilities. Of course, his assertion was and is still widely
debunked. Many scholars have suggested hypnosis as the cause of glossolalia
whereas other experiments have demonstrated that it is a learned behaviour. For
example, an experiment of 60 undergraduates in the USfound that 20 percent
succeeded in speaking in tongues after merely listening to a one-minute sample
while 70 percent accomplished it after training. It is essentially on the third
point of glossolalia being a learned behaviour that will be the core of our
argument.
The issue of speaking in tongues has brought to the fore two main schools of
thought. The first group believes that glossolalia is still in existence; that
it ought to be a miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit, contending that it must be
xenoglossia—that is speaking in tongues must be authentic and untaught. However,
the second school of thought, normally known as Cessationists, maintains that
all charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased in early Christian history; and
therefore speaking in tongues as practised today is simply the utterances of
futile syllables. To them, it is neither xenoglossia nor miraculous but rather a
learned behaviour and possibly self-induced. They clarify their position further
by saying that “tongues” in the New Testament is indeed xenoglossia—a miraculous
gift of the Holy Spirit through which the speaker could communicate in languages
not previously known.
We pause here to recount a story—we cannot confirm its veracity—of a European
evangelist who went to Northern Ghanato preach the gospel. During the preaching,
he realised to his mortification that anything he said threw his audience into
guffaws. Of course he had an interpreter. This continued for about thirty
minutes so he paused, prayed to the Almighty God and when he had finished, what
proceeded left everyone in awe of the power of the omnipotent God: he was
speaking the local language of the area! If this anecdote holds any water, it
goes to support the claim that “tongues” should be a language or languages
previously unknown by the speaker. In the nutshell, the belief that “tongues”
should be a language that someone or a group of people are able to understand is
very strong. However, it is not that clear-cut.
We could not possibly come to a logical conclusion on this subject without
calling on the Holy Writ which chronicles the origin of this most divisive theme
in Christendom. We are going to have to crave your indulgence, dear reader, to
look at the scriptures we will quote. We would not like to turn this write-up
into a sermon. Contrary to popular belief, the first hint of speaking in a
different tongue is found in the Old Testament: Isaiah 28:11. However at this
moment, and in line with what has dominated the debate on this subject, we will
be drawing our conclusions and understanding from the books of Acts and the
first book of Corinthians of the Holy Bible.
First, the Acts of the Apostles is the first book that talks extensively of the
gift of tongues-speaking. The book of Acts 2:1-11 talks about the momentous
events on the day of Pentecost which gave birth to glossolalia. From the
biblical account, tongues of fire settled on the apostles who were then filled
with the Holy Spirit and started speaking with different tongues. From the
account, there were different people from different nations all living in
Jerusalem. The wonderful aspect of the whole phenomenon was that these people
came together as they could hear their own various languages being spoken by the
apostles. The Bible makes it clear that those were languages not previously
known. The same book clarifies in Acts 10:46 that some men who received the Holy
Spirit spoke “with tongues magnifying God”. This same episode happens again in
Acts 19:6 when John lays his hands on some disciples who also speak with
tongues. But the events of Acts 10 and 19 do not talk about “tongues” which
people could comprehend. In this respect then, “tongues” can be a living
language or a strange one to magnify God.
Paul’s first letter to the churchof Corinthis also inundated with various
philosophical arguments concerning spiritual gifts, of which speaking with
different tongues is mentioned. Prominent among the quotes are 1 Corinthians
chapters 12 to 14. In chapter 14:39, Paul tells the church not to “forbid the
speaking in tongues”. In chapter 14:9, Paul controversially intimates that
“tongues” should be easily understood else it becomes pointless. In the
aforesaid chapters, he also talks about the fact that tongues should be
recognised and that there should be an interpreter to explain them. We can
surmise that he was saying there has to be a rationale for glossolalia in the
church. Most importantly, the rhetorical question of 1 Corinthians 14:6 should
be considered by all manner of Christians: “… what good would I do you unless I
spoke to you either with a revelation or with knowledge or with a prophecy or
with a teaching?”
From the two books of the Bible we have read, the truth about speaking in
tongues has never been this glaring unless we are being very thick or we just
cannot make any proper deductions from the biblical texts. The first point is
that glossolalia occurs when the Holy Spirit fills someone. From Acts, the
language (or tongues) the possessed person speaks must be a language that is
known but it can also be unknown as it is indeed an angelic language. The next
point is that it does not have to be a learned behaviour as has become the wont
of a lot of charismatic or Pentecostal Christians. Paul even downplays its
importance in his letter to the Corinthians vis-à-vis the other spiritual gifts
such as prophecy and healing.
In all this, there is one thing which scares us. The Bible makes it clear that
every sin is pardonable but sinning against the Holy Spirit is not forgivable.
We wonder how many Christians have really pondered about this. God will forgive
adultery, murder, idol-worshipping and all the other so-called deadly sins if
offenders ask for forgiveness but there will be no reprieve for someone who sins
against the Holy Spirit. Well, we would need Bible scholars to tell us which
actions constitute sinning against the Holy Spirit; but in our own imagination,
anybody who starts speaking some strange language at church purporting that it
is coming from the Holy Spirit will only be lying against the Holy Spirit if the
bewildering words they spit out are from their own thoughts! The question we are
yet to find an answer to regards the plaudits which can initiate or terminate
tongues-speaking: if the Holy Spirit intends to impart a message to the flock of
God, can hand-clapping start or stop it? Yet, what we see in churches these days
is a pastor explicitly encouraging the congregation to speak in tongues with the
clap of his hands and the same clap stops the tongues-speakers.
We now turn the spotlight on Reverend Skosana. Christianity is being bastardised
by a lot of factors: bad-mouthing, rampant and proven sexual molestation and
immorality among the clergy, extortion of the congregation in the name of God by
way of miracles and blasphemy. There are a lot of problems plaguing Christianity
at this moment, which is why many are now turning away from the churches;
Christianity is dwindling in numbers while atheism is on the ascendancy! The
problem is that there is now nothing like unction by which the Lord God used to
choose people to lead his flock. Now, it seems many leaders of the church look
at the comforts of life they can gain by becoming clergymen and then call and
anoint themselves. Reverend Skosana use of a very bad analogy to express the
fact that God accepts all manner of persons makes us wonder if the Lord really
called him. For like we see with the people He calls, the Lord empowers His
anointed and teaches them what to say. We have our examples in Moses and Samuel.
Is it any wonder that the Bible proclaims that judgement will start in the house
of God?! Some self-appointed men of God will perform miracles and ask for money
as if Christ ever set such an example for His followers to imitate.
It is sad that we are going to have to end this writing by talking about
politicians. But could we possibly desist from doing so when the whole uproar
was began by a man who is the epitome of all that is base and despicable? Dr
Aidoo’s academic credentials have always been questioned. But his inclusion in
the current NDCset-up with his ridiculous and redundant title of Policy
Monitoring and Evaluation at the Castle shows the blinkered view—literally— of
the Mills Administration. I have always thought the four virtues of wisdom,
fortitude, justice and temperance will be the most important factors to consider
in giving positions to people. It may sound harsh but this is the reason why we
would question the visionary aptitude of Professor Mills and his “viziers”. Else
how could they have advised the good professor to thrust Dr Anthony Aidoo into a
responsible position? And oh yes we read politics into this condemnable
utterance of Dr Aidoo! For, if Dr Aidoo were the architect of some heroic deeds,
the NDCwould be claiming the credit; so let them suffer the indignity. Messrs
Ablakwa and Quashigah would have been trumpeting Professor Mills’ far-sighted
prowess and how he foresaw the hidden diamond in Dr Aidoo which had to be
unearthed and polished!
We are wondering if Egya Atta took the pains to verify why Dr Aidoo is one of
the most loathed politicians in Ghana. Dr Aidoo has proved to be incorrigibly
crude yet he occupies an enviable position in the higher echelons of the
National Democratic Congress serving as the appraiser of ministers’
performances. Our politicians and a few media toadies have taken it upon
themselves to divert attention from various pressing issues just as the Caesars
used gladiatorial games to divert the populace’s awareness from hunger,
mismanagement and diseases. We have all been guilty in writing about this but
those who gave Dr Aidoo the power and charged him with reviewing the work of
other ministers are those doing a great disservice to Mother Ghana. The tedious
sermonising of a few dried men in Parliament and in politics, together with
their we-care-about-our-bellies journalists who will justify the untenable are
the brute barbarians bent upon a merciless destruction of Ghana, with Dr Aidoo
infecting his NDCmembers like putrid fever.
Reverend Skosana is indeed a byword of those false prophets in the world today.
They may perform miracles and sway a lot of blind Christians but the final word
is God’s. Many Christians should not forget that it was not only the staff of
Moses that transformed into a snake: the devil has got the power to duplicate
what God does! For Dr Anthony Aidoo, it is striking what he does. This man has
been given the filthy freedom of representing the NDCin official circles and
insulting with careless abandon. Professor Mills, wanting us to believe him as a
decent politician should at least surround himself with respectable people. Dr
Aidoo is like a wild animal: he cannot act or be tamed; he will tear his master
into pieces if he is angry. Such a person must be caged! The debate on
glossolalia will never wane. Our research showed that the Jehovah’s Witnesses,
the Mormons and the Adventists all refuse it while the charismatic and
Pentecostals hold it in the highest of regards. We would really appreciate the
learned men of the Bible solving this problem and persuading all of us on this
subject.
Thomas Dickens (yesiah2003@yahoo.com)
www.thomasdickens.blogspot.com
