lol..it's SEVEN pages long! the link is from
http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/speaking-tongues1.htm
and here's a taste of what it contains
Unlike the tongues which occurred in the Greek mystery religions, the tongues of the New Testament raise a question concerning the form in which the tongues appeared, that is, whether they were in foreign languages or unintelligible ecstatic utterances of no known linguistic origin. Acts 2 indicates that the tongues of Pentecost came in the form of foreign languages, or at the least, the tongues were heard as if they were foreign languages. The other accounts in Acts are not explicit as to form, but seem to follow the form of tongues given at Pentecost, especially since Peter, after hearing Cornelius speak in tongues, states that his experience was the same as the apostles' experience at Pentecost (Acts 11:15).
The specific instances of tongues in the New Testament set the gift apart from the tongues of the Greek religious cults, since the latter are known to be exclusively ecstatic utterances not foreign languages. Yet, the possibility that New Testament tongues could also have come in the form of ecstatic utterances is suggested in the account of tongues at the church of Corinth, as noted by the following points:
1. The tongues-speaker at Corinth is said to speak "mysteries to God" (that no one else understands (1 Cor. 14:2). This means that tongues were not exclusively for men to hear, but were also a form of communication with God. It would make little sense for such private communication to be in the form of an earthly foreign language, since one native language would be no better than another in communicating with God. Moreover, Paul acknowledges the existence of the "tongues of angels" in 1 Cor. 13:1, implying that the heavenly beings have a language all their own. If the tongues of Corinth were similar to this angelic language, it would be a Spirit-inspired language for communication with God. In Romans 8:26-27, Paul teaches that the Spirit, even on a non-miraculous plane, intercedes to God for the Christian with "groanings too deep for words."
2. The tongues-speaker at Corinth is said to edify himself (1 Cor. 14:4). Although the primary purpose of tongues was not self-edification but church-edification, nevertheless, when spoken in private it served a viable function for those who desired to strengthen their relationship with God.
3. The tongues at Corinth required someone to interpret, either the person who spoke the tongue (1 Cor. 14:13) or another person present in the assembly (1 Cor. 14: 27-28). This was not true of the three tongues instances recorded in the book of Acts. This suggests that the tongues at Corinth were of such an other-worldly linguistic origin that no one on earth could understand them without a special interpreter.
4. The tongues at Corinth are not associated with a "language" but to a "sound" (Greek: fwnw:n "phonon") (1 Cor. 14:10-11). This contrasts with the tongues at Pentecost which were heard as a "language" (Greek: dialevktw/ "dialektos") (Acts 2:6, 8; cf., Acts 1:19; 21:40; 22:2; 26:14).
5. Tongues at Corinth were used to give thanks to God (1 Cor. 14:16-17). This shows again that tongues were not used exclusively for preaching the gospel to pagans, as in Acts 2, but were also used for devotion.
6. Tongues were also a private gift, a gift which Paul himself says he used (1 Cor. 14:18-19). A private use, as noted above, implies a special language between God and man, similar to the angels.
7. In 1 Cor. 14:23, Paul states that an unbeliever or ungifted person hearing everyone speak in tongues would determine they were all "insane." Although not definite, an ecstatic utterance might be more susceptible to such an accusation than the linguistically based nature of a foreign tongue.
Other facts, however, do not rule out the conclusion that tongues were in the form of foreign languages:
1. As indicated in Acts 2:5-11, each locale of the world had a specific language. The Corinthians would have spoken the language common to their area, which would have been Greek. Any language outside that area would have been foreign to them. If the gift of tongues were in the form of a foreign language, God could have inspired any of the other regional languages to be spoken in the Corinthian church. In such cases, the foreign language tongue would not have been understood without an interpreter.
2. When Paul warns of the misuse of tongues in 1 Cor. 14:21, he quotes from Isaiah 28:11. The context of Isaiah 28 indicates that the tongues in view are foreign languages, namely the language of the Assyrian invaders. As Paul quotes the passage to the Corinthians he does not feel the need to explain whether there is a difference between the form of tongues among the Corinthians and the foreign languages of the Assyrians, except that it is implicitly understood that the latter did not speak under the power of the Holy Spirit. By quoting Isaiah 28:11 Paul seems to assume the Corinthians know that tongues come in the form of foreign languages.
3. In 1 Cor. 12 and 13 as well, Paul apparently does not see the necessity to redefine the form or nature of tongues after Pentecost before giving guidelines for its use in 1 Cor. 14. If there had been a major difference between the tongues of Acts 2 and the tongues of 1 Cor. 12-14, it seems reasonable to assume that Paul would have given some explanation to the reader, unless, of course, the transition from foreign languages to ecstatic utterances is relatively unimportant to Paul.
4. The word "tongue" is consistently used in the New Testament to refer to a common, or foreign, language. The same is true in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew. The phenomenon of ecstatic utterance is not developed at all in the Bible.
5. The word "interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:5: diermhneuvh/) in the New Testament always refers to the interpretation of a foreign language (cf., John 1:38, 42; 9:7; Hebrews 7:2).
6. On Paul's third missionary journey, around 53-56 A.D., Acts 19 records that the twelve Ephesians spoke in tongues. According to estimates of chronology gleaned from the historical narratives of the New Testament, the tongues at Ephesus were spoken at the approximate time 1 Corinthians was written. Since the Ephesians were speaking in tongues as a continual fulfillment of the events at Pentecost, it would be strange for Paul to be dealing with one kind of tongues with the Ephesians and another kind with the Corinthians, especially when Paul gives no clear indication of such a change.
From this opposing evidence, it remains a possibility that there were two different forms of tongues in the New Testament, foreign languages and ecstatic utterances. A third possibility also exists, however. Biblical tongues may have always come in the form of a Spirit-inspired ecstatic utterance. Such utterances would have no known linguistic background. They would be classed as a spiritual or heavenly language. As directed by the Holy Spirit, at various times the ecstatic utterance could be interpreted by the hearers as a known language, as such as occurred at Pentecost. In the account of Acts 2:6-8, stress is laid on the fact that the men assembled heard the language of their respective nation being spoken. It is also implied by the words in Acts 2:4 ("they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues") and Acts 2:6 ("hearing them speak") that the twelve apostles were all speaking at once. One would expect confusion in such a scene, but each man heard the plurality of apostles speak in his own language. Hence, it is possible that the apostles were speaking in a heavenly utterance while the Spirit made their utterances intelligible to each man present. Support for this possibility comes from the distinctive words used in Acts 2:6. After stating that the apostles spoke in other tongues, Acts 2:6 describes the incident as:
" And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were bewildered, because they were each one hearing them speak in his own language."
