what about speaking in tongues - our daily bread...

WHAT ABOUTSPEAKING INTONGUES?

AAny Christian in his right mind should want all

that God has for him.Furthermore, far too few of us have even begun to realize theinexpressible privilege of having theHoly Spirit of God living within us.Is it possible that the gift of tonguesis God’s way of awakening us to the Person and power within? Or does the current interest intongues reflect a well-meant butmisunderstood effort to duplicatethe experience of Pentecost?

With a loving and thoughtfulapproach, senior research editorHerb Vander Lugt has written thisbooklet to clarify what the Biblereally says about speaking intongues. It is our prayer that thesepages will inspire a deeper desire to study the Word of God and adeeper love for all of His children—charismatic or not.

Martin R. De Haan II

Managing Editor: David Sper Cover Photo & Design: Terry BidgoodScripture quotations are from the New King James Version, ©1979, 1980, 1982, ThomasNelson, Inc., PublishersCopyright © 1989, 2001 RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, Michigan Printed in USA

CONTENTS

What Are People Saying? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

What Is The Situation Today?. . . . . . . 4

What Does The Bible Say About Tongues?. . . . 6

What Happened? . . . . 6

How Did Paul Handle The Misuse Of Tongues? . . . . . . . 11

Why Did God Give The Gift Of Tongues? . . . . . . . 13

More Questions. . . . . . 19

What We Know About Speaking In Tongues . . . . . . . . . . 29

Filled With The Holy Spirit . . . . . . 31

© RBC Ministries. All rights reserved.

WHAT AREPEOPLE SAYING?

AAHousewife. “I was at the kitchen sink

praying for myfamily when suddenly Ifound myself praising Godin a new language. I don’tknow what I said, but I feltGod’s presence. I felt warmand clean. I now pray withfar more delight than everbefore.”

A CompanyRepresentative. “I believedon Jesus but had no joy orvictory in my life until Iwent forward in a churchmeeting to receive thebaptism of the Holy Spirit.At the altar I startedspeaking in tongues and felt a warm glow as the Holy Spirit came.”

A Registered Nurse.“When I became a Christian,a man showed me how toget started speaking intongues. I did it for a while,but I never was satisfied with

my experience. I don’t do itanymore. I’m not sure it waswrong, but I’m better off nowthat I’ve stopped.”

A Former Mormon.“When I was a Mormon, I used to speak in tongues. I thought I was receivingrevelations from God. Now that I have receivedChrist as my Savior, I amconvinced that theseexperiences did not comefrom God. I think they mayhave come from the devil ordemons.”

An UnchurchedRetiree. “I went forward ina camp meeting years ago. I was filled with the HolySpirit and spoke in tongues.I went to church regularlyand had many emotionalhighs for a while. I driftedback to my old ways as the thrill that came fromspeaking in tongues woreoff. I finally gave up. Myonly chance of going toheaven is to get saved justbefore I die.”

2


A Pentecostal Minister.“I spoke in tongues when I was a young Christian, butI don’t do it much anymore.It seems that as I matured inthe faith I felt less and lessinclined toward it. But I stillassociate it with the baptismof the Spirit.”

A Noted Bible Teacher.“After spending 7 yearsstudying this question andreading all sides of the issuethat are in print, and oftenspending many hoursdiscussing it withcharismatics and trying to evaluate it from theirperspective, I am convinced,beyond all reasonabledoubt, that tongues ceasedin the apostolic age 1,900years ago” (John MacArthur,The Truth About Tongues,Word Of Grace, 1984, p.10).

A Linguist And Scholar.“Glossolalia [speaking intongues] as practiced by acomposed clergyman beforea television audience andthat accompanying a

shamanistic seance mayseem quite remote from oneanother, but actually theyare different in degree ratherthan kind. They may beconsidered extremes in overtbehavior on a continuumfrom sedate performance tohysterical activity within the framework of religiousenthusiasm” (George J.Jennings, “An EthnologicalStudy Of Glossolalia,”Journal Of The AmericanScientific Affiliation, March1968, pp.9,10).

A Theologian AndPsychotherapist. “Thereare people who without thisexperience [speaking intongues] would never havebeen able to come topsychological maturity. Theexperience of speaking intongues opened them up tothe unconscious and to afuller, though more difficult,life” (Morton Kelsey,Speaking In Tongues,Hodden, 1965, p.222).

3


WHAT IS THESITUATIONTODAY?

TTongues-speaking is asubject of widespreadChristian interest.

Pentecostals andcharismatics (which include members ofmainline Protestant, Greek Orthodox, andRoman Catholiccongregations) practicespeaking in tongues as anevidence of spiritualrenewal and devotion. Yet, it’s not just a Christianexperience. Many in theoccult and in EasternMysticism, both in and outof the New Age movement,also speak in tongues.

Regrettably, tongueshave become a source ofconfusion and divisionamong many well-meaningChristians. This is partlybecause some tongues-speakers declare it to be anecessary companion to the

baptism of the Spirit andsee Christians who don’tspeak in tongues asdeficient in spiritualexperience. But the fire ofthis controversy is alsofanned by an over-reactionon the part of somenoncharismatics.

The testimonies oftongues-speakers and the writings of scholars who have studied thephenomenon give us mixedsignals. On the one hand,men like John Sherrill tell ofinstances when they haveheard people speak fluentlyin languages they had neverlearned. On the other hand,linguists and anthropologistswho have investigated these

4

“Regrettably,tongues have

become a source of division among

many well-meaningChristians.”


reports have not been ableto verify them.

Dr. E. Pattison says thatin his study of glossolalia(another term for tongues)he has never encounteredanything other thannonlanguage sounds(Journal Of The AmericanScientific Affiliation, Sept.1968, pp.73-86).

Dr. William J. Samarin, a distinguished linguist, haswritten, “It is extremelydoubtful that the allegedcases of xenoglossia(miraculous speech in real languages) are real.Anytime one attempts toverify them, he finds thatthe stories have beengreatly distorted or that the ‘witness’ turns out to beincompetent or unreliablefrom a linguistic point ofview” (Tongues Of Men AndAngels, MacMillan, 1972,pp.112-115).

Anthropologist GeorgeJennings tells of Tibetanmonks who, in their ritual

dances, spoke “in Englishwith quotations fromShakespeare and withprofanity like drunkensoldiers, or in German, orFrench.” He also reports theexperience of a scholar who,while studying the customsof North American Indians,took the drug peyote andheard in the Fox languagewhat he knew was beingsung in the Winnebagodialect. The words left themouth of the singers inWinnebago; they enteredhis ears in Fox. If true, these amazing phenomenacannot be easily explainedas the product of thesubconscious.

The testimony abouttongues today is thereforequite mixed. It neitherproves nor disproves thepractice of miraculousspeech in real languagesamong Christians. If thetongues problem is to besolved, it must be on thebasis of what the Bible says.

5


WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAYABOUTTONGUES?

TThough the Bible doesleave many questionsunanswered about

speaking in tongues, itcertainly isn’t silent on thesubject. In this study, we’regoing to take a look at theNew Testament accountsabout what was sometimesa miracle and sometimes aproblem. We’ll see how theScriptures answer threebasic questions: (1) What happened? (2) How did Paul handle the misuse of tongues? and (3) Why did God givetongues?

WHAT HAPPENED?In any discussion of thesubject of tongues, it isimportant that we have aclear sense of history. Luke,the writer of Acts, recordsthree instances of tongues-

speaking: in Jerusalem just50 days after Christ’sresurrection, in Caesarea 7years later, and in Ephesusafter a period of another 13

years. From 1 Corinthianswe learn that tongues-speaking was a practiceamong the believers in thiscity, and that it was beingmisused in the church.

Tongues In Jerusalem(Acts 2:1-13). It was inSpring on our calendar, just 50 days after Christ’sresurrection, that our Lord’sfollowers first spoke intongues. A group of about

6

THEHISTORY

OF TONGUES


120 were in one of thebuildings of the templecomplex. They weregathered for two reasons.First, they were there inobedience to Jesus who, just before ascending toheaven 10 days earlier, had“commanded them not todepart from Jerusalem, butto wait for the Promise of the Father” (Acts 1:4).Second, along withthousands of devout Jews,they were there to celebratethe traditional Jewishharvest festival of Pentecost.

Suddenly, the disciplesheard a sound like that of astrong wind and saw a fire-like form flicker above everyhead in the room. Then, bythe power of God, theystarted speaking in dialectsthey had never learned. The commotion attracted the attention of many fellowJews who had come from 15provinces to participate inPentecost. Many celebrantswere amazed as they heard

the apostles speaking in the native dialects of eachprovince.

Luke doesn’t fill in all thedetails. He doesn’t tell ushow these people were ableto pick out their owndialects. It seems that about120 people enthusiasticallydeclaring “the wonderfulworks of God” in 15languages would producesuch a cacophony of soundthat no one would be able tounderstand anything. Maybethe Holy Spirit led thedisciples to break up into 15 small groups of about 8people per group. Maybe, asF. F. Bruce suggests, theentire company of believersremained together, shiftingfrom one dialect to anotheruntil they had spoken in all15. One way or another, thedisciples spoke in reallanguages they had neverlearned, and the listenerscould understand them.

We can visualize thescene. The disciples were

7


overcome by the power andjoy of God. The Comforterhad come (see John 16:7-14). They sensed Hispresence. Mysteriously andmightily, their living Lordwas just as near as when Hewalked as one of them. The power of His presencesurged through them. Theywere exhilarated, not byalcohol (Acts 2:15) but bythe Holy Spirit. They couldnot contain their joy. Theyspilled out into the streetsand punctuated the air withtheir speech. The peoplewho gathered were “amazedand perplexed” by what they saw and heard. Andalthough some Jewishpeople mockingly said thedisciples were drunk (2:13),about 3,000 of them musthave been properlyimpressed or they wouldn’thave responded as they didto Peter’s sermon (2:41).

Tongues In Caesarea(Acts 10:44-48; 11:15-18). The time was about AD

38. The place was the homeof a Gentile, the Romancenturion Cornelius. Themessenger, as on the Day ofPentecost, was Peter. Thetongues-speaking was doneby Cornelius and hishousehold as they listenedto Peter and believed hismessage. The hearers of thetongues-speaking wereJewish Christians who hadaccompanied Peter to thisGentile home. They heardthese Gentiles “speak withtongues and magnify God”(10:46). Later, Peter declaredthat the incident was similarto what had happened onthe Day of Pentecost (11:15-18). By speaking inlanguages they had neverlearned, these Gentilesshowed their JewishChristian audience that theSpirit of God was includingthem in “the family of God.”It was a sign to JewishChristians, who mightotherwise have beenhesitant to believe that

8


God would do for Gentileswhat He had done for His“chosen people.”

Tongues In Ephesus(Acts 19:1-7). The timewas about 13 years after the incident in the home ofCornelius—about AD 51.The principals were Paul and 12 people who arecalled “disciples.” They hadbeen baptized with “John’sbaptism” but were not yetaware that the Holy Spirithad come to indwellbelievers in Christ. So Paulinstructed them, baptizedthem in water “in the nameof the Lord Jesus,” and laidhis hands on them. Instantly,“the Holy Spirit came uponthem, and they spoke withtongues and prophesied.” If this incident wasconsistent with the other two occasions recorded inActs, these 12 men spoke indialects unknown to thembut understood by at leastsome of the people whoheard them.

Tongues In Corinth (1 Cor. 12–14). Paul wasin Ephesus about AD 53when he heard that thechurch in Corinth, which hehad founded just a few yearsearlier, was having a varietyof problems. Among theissues to be dealt with was aperversion of the gift oftongues. It appears that thechurch services were beingdisrupted by people makingsounds that neither they noranyone present couldunderstand or interpret. Wedon’t know exactly what washappening. Maybe theywere adopting the ecstaticspeech that was commonpractice in the pagantemples. If so, their“experience of tongues”would have been somethingpsychological rather thanspiritual. Although wecannot be too certain aboutthis, we can be sure that acounterfeit kind of tongues-speaking was present in thischurch. If not, there would

9


have been no problem. It is possible that Paul, whowasn’t there and had todepend upon reports fromothers, didn’t know howmuch of the tongues-speaking was the realmiracle and how much of it was the nonlanguagepsychological phenomenon.

Were the tongues in Actsdifferent from the tongues in1 Corinthians? There weresome differences. In Acts,we encounter only threeoccurrences of tongues-speaking in a period of 20years; in Corinth, it was aregular practice in churchservices. In Acts, we find no indication that any one person had the gift oftongues: at Pentecost it wasthe disciples (about 120 ofthem); in the home ofCornelius it was the newconverts; at Ephesus it wasthe 12 who had just beeninstructed and rebaptized.But in 1 Corinthians 12:10we read about the gift of

tongues and the gift ofinterpretation.

Although we recognizethese differences, we neednot jump to the conclusionthat the spiritual gift oftongues in Corinth was anonlanguage kind ofspeaking. Paul in writing 1 Corinthians and Luke inwriting Acts used the sameGreek word glossa inreference to tongues. In

addition, when Paul wroteabout the gift of tongues, hewrote “kinds of tongues” (1 Cor. 12:10), using theterm gene, which normallydepicted family groupings ofreal languages. And when hequoted from Isaiah 28:11-12

10

“We need notconclude that the

spiritual gift oftongues in Corinthwas nonlanguage

speaking.”


(1 Cor. 14:21), he referred toan incident involving a reallanguage (Assyrian) whichwas unknown to the Jews.

Because of the extent ofthe unholy confusion inCorinth, it is possible thatfor the most part thetongues-speaking in thischurch was neither alanguage nor a gift. Suchtongues-speaking couldhave been a well-meaning,heartfelt exercise of worshipby immature believers whomistakenly thought they had the gift of tongues. Even though not God-given,it may have produced goodfeelings of emotional fervorand release in those whospoke. That may be why itbecame a problem in thechurch services. Too manybelievers were preoccupiedwith well-intentioned butmisguided enthusiasm.

HOW DID PAUL HANDLE THE MISUSE OF TONGUES?In seeking to eliminate thedisruption tongues-speakingwas bringing into thechurch, Paul faced a real problem. He couldn’t be there personally to stopsomeone who startedspeaking with the counterfeitnonlanguage form oftongues. Many Pentecostaland charismatic pastorstoday are frank to admit that they don’t accept alltongues-speaking as God-given and that they

11

THEREGULATIONOF TONGUES


sometimes ask problempeople to refrain fromspeaking. Besides, Paulprobably realized that someof the Corinthian believerswere well-meaning peoplewho enjoyed the experience.They might have beendevastated if told that theirtongues-speaking was notfrom God. Then too, sincethe real gift was still present,Paul didn’t want to give the impression that allspeaking in tongues was tobe avoided. He wanted toleave room for the exerciseof this gift. Therefore, afterexpressing some pros and cons about tongues-speaking in which he neitherfully endorsed nor totallydiscouraged the practice, he set forth eight rules for itsexercise. Here they are asgiven in 1 Corinthians14:26-40:1. Public tongues-speaking

was to benefit and buildup the body (v.26).

2. Only two or three were

to speak in tongues in aservice (vv.27,30).

3. They were to speak inturn (vv.27,30).

4. Tongues were to bespoken only wheninterpreted (vv.27-28).

5. Discerning people wereto weigh the message todetermine its validity(v.29).

6. Women were not tospeak in tongues (v.34).

7. Tongues were not to beforbidden but to be givena lower place thanprophecy (v.39).

8. A proper and orderlyatmosphere in churchservices was to bemaintained (v.40).If these rules were

followed, the tongues-speaking, whether real or counterfeit, would nolonger bring disruption tothe church services.

12


WHY DID GOD GIVE THE GIFT OFTONGUES?Why did God enable peopleto speak in languages theyhad never learned? Theapostle Paul answered thisquestion by giving us itsprimary and secondarypurposes. He wrote,“Therefore tongues are for asign” (1 Cor. 14:22) anddeclared that as a spiritualgift it was bestowed on“each one for the profit ofall” (1 Cor. 12:7).

The Sign Function.While we cannot find in

Acts a specific statementthat tongues-speakingfunctioned as a sign, we can easily see how it did. On the Day of Pentecost thetongues-speaking was thephenomenon that drew thecrowd, and it undoubtedlywas a powerful factor inopening the hearts of Jewishpeople to Peter’s message. It served as a sign,authenticating the apostlesas representatives of therisen Christ. We can alsoassume that it was anassuring sign to the apostlesthemselves. They could seeit as a partial fulfillment ofChrist’s promise, “And thesesigns will follow those whobelieve: . . . they will speakwith new tongues . . .” (Mk.16:17). They may have eventaken the fact that theyspoke in 15 Gentile dialectsas a sign that the good newswas, as Jesus had said, forall the world (Mt. 28:19;Acts 1:8).

The sign function of 13

THEPURPOSE

OF TONGUES


tongues-speaking is alsoquite obvious in the othertwo incidents recorded byLuke. When the Romancenturion and his household(Gentiles who had notbecome proselytes of theJewish faith) believed, theyspoke in tongues. They did it in the presence of “thoseof the circumcision whobelieved” (Acts 10:45),Jewish Christians. Peter saw this as a sign that theseGentiles were to be baptizedbecause they “have receivedthe Holy Spirit just as wehave” (Acts 10:47). It was a sign to these Jewishbelievers that Gentiles werefellow-members with themin the body of Christ. Thetongues-speaking of the 12people in Acts 19:1-7 wasundoubtedly a sign to themthat they had received theHoly Spirit (whom theyhadn’t yet heard of) and asign of Paul’s authority toeveryone present.

When we turn from Acts

to 1 Corinthians, we findPaul listing tongues amongthe sign gifts (12:7-11) anddeclaring, “Thereforetongues are for a sign”(14:22). This gives us a solid basis for concludingthat even though tongues-speaking occurred in churchservices here and wastermed a “gift,” it stillretained its sign function.

Paul further defined thissign function by declaringthat it was a sign “not to those who believe but to unbelievers” (14:22). Wecan determine who Paul hadin mind by a look at theGreek term he used. It isapistis, which literally means“no faith” or “without faith.”In the Bible it usually refersto the unbelief of theunsaved—people who didn’tbelieve, whether throughignorance or deliberaterejection. But it is sometimesused in relation to theelement of unbelief that canbe present in true believers.

14


Speaking to His disciples,Jesus said that they couldn’tcast out certain demonsbecause of their “unbelief”(Mt. 17:20). He exhortedThomas, “do not beunbelieving, but believing”(Jn. 20:27). The father whobelieved in Jesus enough tocome to Him for the healingof his son said, “Lord, Ibelieve; help my unbelief!”(Mk. 9:24). It is obvious,therefore, that the meaningof the term unbelievers neednot be restricted to unsavedpeople. It can take inbelievers who need specialhelp to increase their faith.

Tongues-speaking onPentecost served as anassuring sign to the disciples and a credentialsign to the nonbelievers byauthenticating the apostlesas truly representing JesusChrist. It helped the weakfaith of the apostles and theunbelief of many of the Jewswho were there. In the homeof Cornelius it was a sign for

Jews who had believed butneeded an indication thatGentiles too could receivethe Holy Spirit and becomemembers of the body ofChrist. In Ephesus, thebelievers spoke in tonguesprobably as a sign to themabout the reality of the HolySpirit’s presence and toothers as a sign of Paul’sauthority. In each Actsaccount, it was a sign toeither unbelievers or toimmature Christians.

The true gift of tongues-speaking in Corinthundoubtedly would haveserved the same purpose. It was a sign to the peoplePaul referred to as“uninformed or unbelievers”(1 Cor. 14:23). The“uninformed” were probablypeople who we might callinquirers—those who wereinterested and sympatheticbut had not yet believed onChrist. The “unbelievers” in this instance were likelynonbelievers who came into

15


the services either out ofsincere interest or merecuriosity. Tongues were acredential sign to suchpeople, authenticating thosewho proclaimed the gospel.

Since the gift of tongues isnot mentioned in any otherepistle, it is possible that thisgift was unique in theCorinthian church becauseof a special Jewish situation.In Acts 18:1-17, we are toldthat in founding the churchPaul held services in a housenext door to the synagogue.Could it be that an unusualnumber of Jews came in tosee and hear what was goingon? Apparently Sosthenes,who is introduced as theruler of the synagogue inActs 18:17, did. We knowthis because Paul addresseshim as a brother in his firstletter to the Corinthianchurch (1 Cor. 1:1). Onething is certain. The primarypurpose of tongues-speakingas reported in Acts andpracticed in Corinth was its

function as a sign. Yet itsoon became mixed andconfused with a form ofemotional expression.

Tongues-speaking alsomay have helped strengthenor develop the faith ofbelievers in Corinth as it didat the home of Cornelius(Acts 10). Paul hints at thisin 1 Corinthians 14:4, “Hewho speaks in a tongueedifies himself.” The questionwe must ask is, “How did itedify the speaker? He didn’tknow what he was saying.”Paul said of such speakingthat the “understanding isunfruitful” (1 Cor. 14:14), themind receives nothing. Theedification, therefore, had tobe in the emotional area

16

“The primarypurpose of tonguesas reported in Actsand practiced inCorinth was its

function as a sign.”


alone. Tongues-speakingedified because it was to thespeaker a sign of God’spresence, a token that theHoly Spirit was working inhis life. Interpreted tongues-speaking, while makingknown something of spiritualcontent, functioned mainlyas a sign. Prophecy in plainlanguage was far moreeffective as a means ofcommunicating spiritualtruth. The chief value of evenuninterpreted tongues was itsfunction as a sign of God’spresence.

The EdificationFunction. While affirmingthe sign function of tongues-speaking as its primarypurpose, Paul also alluded toits edifying effect. It was oneof the gifts of the Spirit (1Cor. 12:4-11), and as such itwas designed “for the profit”(Greek text of 1 Cor. 12:7).

The person who spoke in tongues withoutinterpretation didn’t knowwhat he was saying. But he

was built up by the fact thathe viewed the experience asevidence of the Spirit’spresence in his life. This hadsome value. Moreover, self-edification, though not theultimate goal of the spiritualgifts, is a blessing worthseeking. Peter closed hissecond epistle with theadmonition, “But grow in thegrace and knowledge of ourLord and Savior Jesus Christ”(2 Pet. 3:18). It is right toseek to be edified when ourmotive is to bring greaterglory to God and blessing toothers. And we grow strongerspiritually through Biblereading, prayer, obedience,and the exercise of our gifts.

Paul didn’t rule out thepossibility that uninterpretedtongues might have hadsome value for self-edification. But interpretedtongues went a step furtherand brought a degree ofspiritual benefit to thechurch. And Paul neversuggested that people seek

17


the gift of tongues for thepurpose of edifying eitherthemselves or others. In thisrole it was far inferior toprophecy—declaring amessage from God in plain,everyday speech. Toemphasize this point, Paulproceeded to list seven waysin which uninterpretedtongues were less valuableto the spiritual welfare of thechurch than prophecy.1. Speaking in uninterpreted

tongues edified only thespeaker, not the church(1 Cor. 14:1-6).

2. Speaking in tonguescould lead to confusion;prophecy broughtillumination (vv.7-12).

3. Speaking in tongues did not benefit the mindof either speaker orhearer; prophecy broughtunderstanding (vv.13-15).

4. Praying in tongues,unlike prayer in a knownlanguage, didn’t benefitthose who heard it(vv.16-17).

5. Speaking in tonguescould be an indication ofspiritual immaturity—atendency to prefer themore showy gift oftongues to the more solidgift of prophecy (v.20).

6. Hearing unknowntongues was once apunishment for the Jewsbecause they haddespised the plain wordsof Isaiah (vv.21-22).

7. Too much tongues-speaking in a publicservice could be ahindrance to thesalvation of nonbelieverspresent; unlimitedprophecy could be themeans of bringingconviction and salvation(vv.23-25).It follows that edification

through tongues—for oneselfor the church—is not itsmajor purpose. Proclaimingand hearing God’s messagein common speech is farsuperior and desirable.

18


MOREQUESTIONS

WWhy did Paul say he wished everyone could

speak in tongues? In theprocess of making a series of statements showing thelimited value of tongues-speaking, Paul wrote, “I wish you all spoke withtongues” (1 Cor. 14:5). Thisseems to be a strangestatement. In the first place,he had already indicatedthat God had not giventongues to everyone (1 Cor.12:30-31). Second, it is hardto understand why he wouldwish that everybodyexercised a gift that had solittle value.

We won’t have difficultywith this statement if werealize that Paul wasexpressing a statement ofpersonal desire. We often do this. The president of acompany, for example, mightsay to his employees, “I wish

all of you could be making$100,000 a year.” He knowsthis isn’t possible. But he’dlike it to be that way.

Paul did the same thingearlier in this epistle, whenhe wrote, “I wish that allmen were even as I myself ”(1 Cor. 7:7). It was hispersonal desire that allcould be celibate because of the spiritual advantagesof celibacy. But he knewthat God didn’t give the giftof singleness to everybody.Therefore he added, “Buteach one has his own giftfrom God, one in thismanner [to marry] andanother in that [not tomarry]” (7:7). Paul wouldhave liked for all to speak in tongues. The gift hadsome value. However, justas it isn’t God’s will to granteveryone the gift of celibacy,it wasn’t His will to bestowthe gift of tongues oneverybody.

Why did Paul thankGod that he exceeded

19


everyone else in tongues-speaking? While listing theways in which the gift oftongues is inferior to the giftof prophecy, Paul wrote, “I thank God I speak withtongues more than you all”(14:18). This statementraises at least threequestions: (1) What did hemean? (2) When did he doall this tongues-speaking?(3) Why did he write this?

Paul was referring to thefrequency of his tongues-speaking. He did not say, “I speak in more languagesthan anyone else.” The wordmore in the Greek languageis an adverb, not anadjective. It thereforemodifies the verb speak,not the noun tongues. Theidea, then, is “more often”rather than “more tongues.”

When did Paul do all this tongues-speaking? In private? In church? Or in connection with hisevangelistic or missionarywork? It does not seem

likely that he used tonguesas a private or public prayerlanguage. He said he didn’twant to pray without the fullinvolvement of his mind,“For if I pray in a tongue,my spirit prays, but myunderstanding is unfruitful.What is the result then? I will pray with the spirit,and I will also pray with the understanding” (1 Cor.14:14-15).

It’s possible that heregularly exercised the gift of tongues and the gift ofinterpretation in churchservices, but the contextsuggests that he didn’t. He went to great lengths toshow the superiority ofprophecy over tongues, evencontrasting them. He saidthat in church he wouldrather speak 5 words withhis understanding than10,000 words in a tongue(v.19). God’s truth could beexpressed far more simplythrough prophecy.

Since it appears unlikely 20


that Paul used tongues inprivate prayer or in churchservices, it follows that heprobably did this in his roleas missionary or evangelist.

To visualize how Paul spokein tongues more thananyone else, we probablyshould think of the Actspattern. Picture Paulintroducing a new group ofpeople to Christ. See him,either alone or with others,praising God throughdialects they had neverlearned. This tongues-speaking, like that whichoccurred on the Day ofPentecost, would be acredential sign for new

believers and for theunsaved who might bepresent. Since he was theforemost missionary of thefirst century, he would haveoccasion to do this morethan anyone else.

Why did Paul say that he spoke in tongues moreoften than the Corinthianbelievers? Maybe he wantedto show them that hisnegative statements abouttongues didn’t originate inhis personal frustration. It was not a case of sourgrapes or a coverup for hisown inadequacy in tongues-speaking.

Did tongues ceasebefore AD 100? Theyprobably did. The testimonyof the New Testament andchurch history strongly pointin this direction. The writerof Hebrews used the pasttense when he declared that God had confirmed theapostolic witness with “signsand wonders,” “variousmiracles,” and “gifts of the

21

“In the church Iwould rather speakfive words with myunderstanding . . .than ten thousandwords in a tongue.”

—Paul (1 Cor. 14:19)


Holy Spirit” (Heb. 2:1-4).Tongues-speaking wouldcertainly come under thecategory of “signs andwonders.” Moreover, church historians havefound no evidence oftongues-speaking among the church fathers of thesecond century. The practicewas present only among afew heretical followers ofMontanus. And until recenttimes, tongues-speaking hasbeen unknown among thevast majority of the Lord’speople.

Even though there isgood reason to believe thattongues-speaking ceasedwith the ending of theapostolic age, the Bibledoesn’t specifically state that this is the case. Manyuse 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 to prove that the miracle oftongues-speaking is anabsolute impossibility today,but this passage isn’tconclusive.

Some take the words

“when that which is perfecthas come” (13:10) to be a reference to the NewTestament. They point outthat the Greek word used in relation to the gifts ofprophecy and knowledge iskatargeo in the passivevoice. They say that thesegifts were “renderedinoperative” by theacceptance of the NewTestament and that tonguessimply stopped (pauo) atsome point before thecompletion of the NewTestament Scriptures.

Some Bible scholarsbelieve that this verse isreferring to the maturity ofthe church, while othersmaintain that it is thesecond coming of Christ.The logic for all these viewsis good, but none of themcan be proven with absolutecertainty. I believe that it’sbest to see the expression“that which is perfect” as areference to eternity. It isonly then that we will see

22


“face to face” and “knowjust as I also am known”(13:12).

In summary, we canadvance solid reason forbelieving that tonguesceased at the close of theapostolic age. But we cannot prove that they did on the basis of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13.

Is tongues-speaking the evidence of Spiritbaptism? Manycharismatics andPentecostals view Spiritbaptism as an after-salvationexperience that isaccompanied by miraculoustongues-speaking. Theypoint out that the coming ofthe Holy Spirit and tongues-speaking occurred togetherin Acts 2, 10, and 19. Theyspeak of experiencing a“tingling feeling,” a “warmglow,” and a “sense ofcleansing” when they werebaptized by the Spirit. Theysay that they also spoke intongues. And many of them

insist that when a personreceives the Holy Spirit hewill always speak in tonguesas a sign of the Holy Spirit’scoming.

Those who say that Spiritbaptism and tongues-speaking always go togethermake three mistakes. First,they overlook the fact thatthe historical instances ofsimultaneous tongues-speaking and Spirit baptismwere unique and pivotalevents: the birth of thechurch (Acts 2), the openingof the door to the Gentiles(Acts 10), and the end of thevalidity of John’s baptism(Acts 19). They fail toconsider that there is no evidence of tongues-speaking in most of the

23

“If anyone does not have

the Spirit of Christ,he is not His.”

—Romans 8:9


salvation accounts of Acts:the 3,000 on the Day ofPentecost (2:41), theEthiopian eunuch (8:37),Saul (9:1-9), the “greatnumber” in Antioch (11:21),the “multitude” in Iconium(14:1), Lydia, the Philippianjailer, and their households(16:14-15,30-34).

Their second error is a wrong concept of thebaptism of the Spirit. Theysee it as occurring eitherdays, weeks, or even yearsafter salvation. They saythat some Christians neverreceive it. But Paul gave usa precise definition of Spiritbaptism. He declared that itis the act of the Holy Spiritby which He makes everybeliever a member of thebody of Christ. We read,“For by one Spirit we wereall baptized into one body”(1 Cor. 12:13).

Their third error is their failure to distinguishbetween the baptism of theHoly Spirit and His filling.

Spirit baptism is a fact inevery believer’s salvationencounter. The filling issomething that happenswhen we yield ourselves to the Lord in trust andobedience. We arecommanded to be filled withthe Spirit (Eph. 5:18), butnever to be Spirit baptized.Moreover, in 1 Corinthians12:30 Paul indicated thatnot all believers could speakin tongues. But he said thatall have been baptized intoChrist’s body (v.13). The twoare not indispensably linked.

Was tongues a sign of judgment on the Jews?There seems to be anelement of truth to this view.First Corinthians 14:20-25shows us that in someinstances tongues were morea sign of judgment than ofblessing. When Paul quotedIsaiah 28:11-12, he cited aninteresting precedent for the use of foreign tongues.Because the Israelites ofIsaiah’s day would not listen

24


to God speak through theprophet in plain and simplespeech, they ended uphearing Him speak to themthrough the language of theconquering Assyrians.

In a sense, the foreigntongues that were spoken atPentecost served a similarfunction. They served as asign signaling the fact thatGod temporarily would beworking in and through aninternational body known as the church rather thanthrough the nation of Israel.

However, to say that thejudgment idea is the onlysign function of tongues issaying too much. We

have seen that it had aconfirming, authenticatingvalue. Besides, this viewmisses the point Paul wasmaking in the passage.When he wrote, “Brethren,do not be children inunderstanding; . . . but inunderstanding be mature”(14:20), he was gentlyscolding them for theirfailure to see clearly thelimited value of tongues.They are not effective toproduce spiritual change.Paul quoted Isaiah as sayingthat even when the Israeliteswould hear the strangetongues of their Assyrianinvaders, they still wouldnot listen to nor turn to theLord. In other words, ifpeople won’t listen to theWord of God in plain andsimple language, how willthey ever listen to Him inwords they can’tunderstand?

The Corinthian believers,like the Israelites, needed torealize that a priority was

25

“Do not be children inunderstanding;

. . . but inunderstanding be mature.”

—Paul (1 Cor. 14:20)


to be placed on the clear,simple prophecies of theLord. Hearing God’smessage in a foreignlanguage would notaccomplish more in theirmidst than the plain wordsof prophecy.

What about privatepraying in tongues? ManyChristians who never speakin tongues publicly areenthusiastic about usingtongues as a private prayerlanguage. They admit thatthey don’t understand whatthey are praying, but theyclaim that it makes themsense God’s presence andleads them into real words of praise, adoration, petition,and intercession. Theysupport this practice from certain verses in 1 Corinthians 14. Paul spokeabout speaking in tongues“to God” in verses 2 and 28.And he specifically referredto praying in tongues inverses 14 through 17.

It seems very unlikely,

however, that the apostlePaul was either referring to or encouraging a validprivate prayer language.Although such aninterpretation can be readinto the text, it doesn’t seemnatural to the flow of whathe was saying. If Paul didtell his readers to practiceuninterpreted tongues inprivate rather than in public, he certainly wasn’temphasizing this privateuse. His emphasis was thatthey were not to do it inpublic.

To interpret Paul’s wordsin 1 Corinthians 14 as anaffirmation of privatetongues-speaking is to misshis point. It is like a childsaying that because hisparents told him to keep his mess in his own room,they are condoning andencouraging a messy life.When in reality, the parentsjust didn’t want the wholefamily to have to live with it.

Furthermore, it’s 26


important to realize thatPaul was in a position ofhaving to regulate theintrusion of counterfeittongues in the church.Certainly the Holy Spirit wasnot giving utterance to thatwhich was so unprofitableand disorderly. But becausethe apostle was not on thescene in Corinth to passjudgment on each case, and because the real gift of tongues was still inexistence, he did a very wise thing. He gave inspiredprinciples for regulatingtongues so that it would notcontinue to be a disruptiveforce in the church.

That is far different from saying that Paul wasaffirming and dignifying anew way of praying—a newspiritual gift that wouldenable us to talk to Godwithout using our minds.This is not consistent withthe way the Lord asks us toapproach Him, nor with thepurpose of tongues as a

supernatural sign for peoplewhose faith needed to bekindled or developed.

There is no reason tobelieve that Paul wasrecommending a privateprayer language. He made it clear that prayer involvingthe mind is better (vv.14-17).At best, Paul might havebeen saying in verse 28 thatif a person wanted to speakor pray in uninterpretedtongues, he should do it byhimself, not in the church.

Furthermore, those who practice or advocate theuse of tongues as a privateprayer language should beaware of the possibility that they may be doingsomething Jesus forbade. He said, “But when youpray, do not use vainrepetitions as the heathendo. For they think that theywill be heard for their manywords” (Mt. 6:7). If youhave seen printed-outtranscripts of nonlanguagetongues, you know that the

27


sounds are very repetitive.Here is an example oftongues-speaking from awell-known work by Dr.George B. Cutter: “prou prayproddey, pa pallassate papau pu pe, teli terattata taw,terrea te te-te-te-te, vole virtevum, elee lete lede luto,singe singe singe, imba,imba, imba.” Does thatsound like vain repetition to you?

In summary, the Bible doesn’t recommendusing tongues as a privateprayer language. Besides,this practice, like allnonlanguage tongues-speaking, can be dangerous.It may lead a person to takesomething that is nothingmore than an exciting

psychological phenomenonas a genuine miracle andtoken of God’s approval.Like transcendentalmeditation, mystical rituals,and other mind-emptyingprocedures, it may open thedoor to demonic influences.It can promote a false ideathat there is an easy road to a rich prayer life andspiritual maturity. It canpromote a false sense ofunity with people who holdwidely diverse beliefs on theessentials. And worst of all,it can easily degenerate intoa series of “vain repetitions,”the very thing against which Jesus issued a solemn warning. Theseconsiderations should betaken seriously by all whoare inclined to believe that a private prayer language issomething to be desired.

28

“When you pray,do not use vain

repetitions as theheathen do.”—Jesus (Mt. 6:7)


WHAT WEKNOW ABOUTSPEAKING INTONGUES1. The first occurence

of speaking in unknowntongues in the Bibleinvolved God’sjudgment at the tower of Babel (Gen. 11:1-9).

2. The next reference totongues was in Isaiah’swarning to Israel of acoming judgment by anation that would speakto them in anotherlanguage (Isa. 28:11-12;1 Cor. 14:21).

3. At Pentecost, tongueswere a sign confirmingPeter’s words indictingIsrael for their rejectionand crucifixion of theMessiah (Acts 2:12-36).

4. On the Day ofPentecost, tongues were also a sign to thedisciples of the comingof the Spirit (Acts 2:2-4,16-18).

5. At Pentecost, the Spiritenabled the disciples tospeak in real dialectspreviously unknown to the speakers (Acts2:5-11).

6. Tongues were a sign to unbelievers, notbelievers (1 Cor. 14:22).

7. Speaking in tonguesand interpretation of tongues weresupernatural gifts of theSpirit (1 Cor. 12:10,28).

8. God bestowed the gift of tongues andinterpretation of tongueson some but not allbelievers (1 Cor. 12:30).

9. Tongues-speaking wasof lesser importancethan prophecy and offar less importance thanlove (1 Cor. 12:31; 13).

10. Paul said that the gift of tongues “will cease”(1 Cor. 13:8).

11. The gift of prophecywas better than tonguesbecause it edified thechurch (1 Cor. 14:1-4).

29


12. At best, uninterpretedtongues could only edifythe speaker (1 Cor. 14:4).

13. Unregulated speaking in tongues sometimesled to confusion (1 Cor. 14:7-12).

14. In Corinth, public speaking inuninterpreted tongueshad no value (1 Cor.14:13-19).

15. Preoccupation withtongues was a sign of immaturity (1 Cor. 14:20).

16. Unregulated tonguescould be a hindrance inthe salvation of others (1 Cor. 14:23).

17. Since tongues could becounterfeited, publictongues-speaking had to be strictly regulated (1 Cor. 14:26-40).

18. Public tongues-speakingwas to benefit and buildup the body (1 Cor.14:26).

19. Only two or three wereto speak in tongues in

a service, and they were to speak in turn (1 Cor. 14:27,30).

20. Tongues were not to be used in churchwithout supernaturalinterpretation (1 Cor.14:28).

21. Women were not tospeak in tongues in thechurch (1 Cor. 14:34).

22. A proper and orderlyatmosphere in churchservices was to bemaintained (1 Cor.14:40).

23. Acts and 1 Corinthiansare the only NewTestament books that refer to tongues-speaking.

24. Tongues-speaking wasnot the universalevidence of the baptismof the Spirit, becausewhile every true believeris baptized by the Spirit,not all believers spoke in tongues (1 Cor.12:13).

30


FILLED WITHTHE HOLY SPIRIT

TThe sound of a highwind. The ability to speak in foreign

languages unlearned bythose who spoke. Thesemiraculous occurrencesmarked the arrival of theHoly Spirit on the Day ofPentecost to indwell andempower the followers ofChrist to turn their worldupside down (Acts 17:6).

Does the Holy Spirithave you? This same all-powerful Holy Spirit indwellsGod’s people today. Paulreminded the Christians inCorinth of this truth byasking, “Or do you not knowthat your body is the templeof the Holy Spirit? (1 Cor.6:19). Why, then, are we sooften powerless, defeated,and fearful? The answer isfound in our failure to takethis truth to heart. We try tolive in our own strength. Wedon’t give the Spirit of God

full control over our lives.We grieve the Holy Spiritwith our disobedience andquench His power in us by our half-heartedness(Eph. 4:30; 1 Th. 5:19).

But we don’t have to livethis way! God’s Spirit livesin us, yearning to help us.To be “filled with the Spirit”(Eph. 5:18), we mustrecognize His presence,depend on Him, and submitto Him. Then, as we “walkin the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16), He will produce in us “thefruit of the Spirit . . . love,joy, peace, longsuffering,kindness, goodness,faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Gal. 5:22-23).

Another benefit of beingSpirit-filled is the assurancethat we are God’s children.Paul wrote, “The SpiritHimself bears witness with our spirit that we arechildren of God, and ifchildren, then heirs— heirsof God and joint heirs withChrist” (Rom. 8:16-17).

31


The path to spiritual powerand joy is not that of seekingspiritual gifts but that ofdependence upon andsubmission to the indwellingHoly Spirit.

Do you have theSpirit? In Romans 8:9, Paulwrote, “Now if anyone doesnot have the Spirit of Christ,he is not His.” If you are likethe 12 men of Acts 19 whodidn’t even know about theHoly Spirit, you need to takethe first step of faith. First,you must admit that you area sinner who needs God’sforgiveness. Then, believethat Jesus Christ died foryour sins, agree that Heconquered death, and placeyour trust in Him. If you do,you will receive Hisforgiveness of your sins(Eph. 1:7). You will receive anew guiltless standing beforeGod and be accepted byHim (Rom. 5:1-2). You willreceive a new birth—makingyou a child in God’s family(1 Jn. 5:1). And you will

receive the Holy Spirit as thedivine tenant in your bodyto give you power over sin(1 Cor. 6:19) and to give youa guarantee of eternal life (2 Cor. 5:5-8; Eph. 1:13-14).

Believe on the Lord Jesustoday. Don’t hesitate if you think of yourself asunworthy. It is because noone can earn heaven thatGod provided the way toHimself. John 3:16 says,“For God so loved the world that He gave His onlybegotten Son, that whoeverbelieves in Him should notperish but have everlastinglife.”

When you believe inChrist, you will have HisSpirit. Then you are to letHis Spirit have you.

32

“When you believein Christ,

you will have all of the Spirit all of the time.”


Our mission is to make the life-changing wisdom of the Bible understandable and accessible to all.

Discovery Series presents the truth of Jesus Christ to the world in balanced, engaging, and accessible resources that show the relevance of Scripture for all areas of life. All Discovery Series booklets are available at no cost and can be used in personal study, small groups, or ministry outreach.

To partner with us in sharing God’s Word, click this link to donate. Thank you for your support of Discovery Series resources and Our Daily Bread Ministries.

Many people, making even the smallest of donations, enable Our Daily Bread Ministries to reach others with the life-changing wisdom of the Bible. We are not funded or endowed by any group or denomination.

CLICK TO DONATE

http://ourdailybread.org/donate/

what about speaking in tongues - our daily bread...

Documents