Speaking in tongues

I haven't studied this area myself, but as far as I know, speaking in tongues is only mentioned by the early church as something that happened in the apostolic age.

My perception is that miracles of this kind are most common when the gospel is first preached in an area (even to this day), and that they aren't expected to continue, although they can.

What if the unknown tongue was English? The had the gift of diverse tongues to expand the Kingdom, maybe English was unknown to them at that time. I’m hardly a historian so I wouldn’t know. Just a thought is all.

I believe John Gill's commentary says that the Early Church Fathers believed this to refer to 'the special language which the Jews of old spoke; the language God spoke to Moses in.'

Paul was highly taught, and so he would have learned this language and used in it prayer because the tradition was that this language was special to God.

I've not studied it in any depth, but if Gill is correct and if we have proof of this position by the Early Church that seems to me to fit pretty well into the 1st Corinthians passages.

Here are a couple thoughts I have on this topic, taken from 1 Corinthians 12.

In 1 Corinthians 12, the stage is set by v.3: "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."

In verse 4-6, Paul explains that different people have different gifts of the Spirit, but they all come from the same Spirit.

In verse 7, he says that each believer gets the manifestation (appearing) of the Spirit, for the improvement of all.

In verses 8-10, he explains what some of these gifts are: word of wisdom (wise counsel), word of knowledge (knowledgeable counsel), faith(!), gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits (ability to judge), various kinds of tongues (speaking in tongues), and interpreting of tongues. Notice that the people who claim speaking in tongues is THE manifestation of the Spirit believe that if you have the Spirit of God, you must speak in tongues.

But Paul lists speaking in tongues mixed in with other gifts, including faith. Why does nobody say that faith is the primary gift of the Spirit? It seems to me that if any gift is given to everyone, it should be this one. If speaking in tongues would be the first and foremost gift, it should be at the top of the list, and he would give that in verse 7 as the evidence that a person is Spirit-filled.

In verse 11, he re-emphasizes that all these gifts are done by the same Spirit, and that He (the Spirit) gives gifts to believers as He wills.

Jumping down to verse 17, Paul points out that just as different members of a body have different functions, different members of the Body of Christ have different functions.

In verse 28-30, this point is re-emphasized again.

How could a body survive if every limb were a leg? But this is what people are trying to do when they insist that we all need to speak in tongues.

The argument I have heard goes like this: "On the day of Pentecost, they were all given the gift of tongues. Therefore, we should all speak in tongues once we have the Holy Spirit."

Really? Then why did Paul say, "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." Should we expect to all be apostles, prophets, and teachers then too? Notice that whenever this topic comes up in the New Testament, it's always "as the Spirit gave them utterance" or "as He wills", never "as they desired" or anything similar.

Another thing, some of these gifts (the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faith, etc.) require personal development on our part- it's not necessarily just something God dumped on him one day. David Bercot did not just wake up one day and discover he could accurately describe what the early Christians could say on any one topic. Neither did Lynn Martin just magically learn to describe in detail all the arguments the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox come up with.

These things take study and self-discipline. Is it possible, then, that speaking in tongues is sometimes simply a gift to learn languages?

My conclusion then, is that these gifts could still be around today. Not that everyone has all of them, or that we should necessarily expect a certain gift, but we should be open to the possibility. There are instances, I know, where unusual miracles have been performed even in our times, but it's always as God wills.

I think that that is a very good answer Joshua. It seems that most people take one of two extreme positions. Some say that every true Spirit filled Christian should speak in tongues. Then most of the others say that nobody speaks in tongues anymore. I think that you presented a very balanced view. Thanks.

Speaking in tongues is definitely mentioned in the New Testament as being part of the first century church. It seemed to continue until around the middle of the third century. Origen makes repeated mention in his commentaries of the gift of tongues having stopped and no longer being necessary. I cannot recall his exact words, but I know I saw it in his Homilies on Ephesians, possibly others too. Yet he affirmed, as did Cyprian after him, that prophecy did continue thereafter.

The irony of it is that for much of my time in the faith Pentecostal and charismatic churches are where I've found fellowship and continue to. I have mixed feelings about the matter myself. I believe that God could easily give someone the gift today and He may well have. However, much of what I see flies directly in the face of the Scriptures.

The Pentecostal churches have a very troubled history, most notably when, in the early 20th century, following the Azusa Street Revival, they sent several self-appointed missionaries to China, India and Japan who believed they could speak the language and did not need linguistics training because of "the gift of tongues." However, they could not do so. This is evidence to me that while God has some people in these churches, the movements themselves aren't of Him.

Additionally, most try to explain this away by calling the tongues "heavenly languages." Searching the Scriptures, I find this concept only mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13, in which Paul doesn't say for sure he has this ability, but that if he did, it wouldn't matter if he had no love. I personally have never spoken in tongues, although I have operated in other spiritual gifts. Several have tried to "teach me how" but I am not interested.

I long ago told the Lord "if I am going to speak in tongues, it will be from You. If You want me to have it, I know You will give it to me." Most of these "how-to" lessons are foolish attempts to teach someone to "fake it till you make it", which is proof in my mind that many of them are counterfeit. I will not give in to such.

Additionally still, many will place emphasis on the gift of tongues, but will not heed Paul's directions in 1 Corinthians 14 which tell the speaker to be silent if there is no interpreter and keep this to prayer time with God in private, and also forbid a woman to speak in church. Paul makes very clear that if you think you're a prophet or spiritual and don't recognize that he is writing commands of God, then God doesn't recognize you.

I attend the church I do because I have a working relationship with the pastor and have for a long time. However, I find it hard to find fellowship in most charismatic churches due to the self-aggrandizing atmosphere present. I cannot easily recommend one for the one seeking to learn of Christ (though there are a few).

It's great to hear your personal experience, Kevan, thanks for sharing it!

There are two works which I recommend on this subject and another form of what may be referred to as mysticism. The Anabaptist have faced a few radicals who have used their special inspiration to become cults of personality and so many folks wariness is understandable. Jonathan Edward’s Religious Affections cover many of the topics in sometimes tedious detail, but tie it all together in the end nicely.

Another work is Gregory Palamas in his The Triads, not about “tongues” but on quiteness or hearing the small still voice thru prayer.

Kevan,

There are two things you said that caught my attention and my response is: 1. I am 55 years old and I have never seen anyone speak in tongues biblically, though I have heard people make noises. 2. You cannot teach someone to speak in tongues, that is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

I also believe that if the Holy Spirit wants to give the gift of speaking in tongues then He can do it, even today. However, it can only be given by the Holy Spirit, man cannot teach others to do it.

Chris, I wholeheartedly agree with you. Unfortunately I can't verify the legitimacy of a single time I thought I heard tongues (no interpretation present as people have no regard for 1 Corinthians 14, call anyone who does a religious spirit, which isn't a biblical term, and invent ways to get around it). What goes on in most Pentecostal and charismatic churches is like a non ascetic version of the Montanists. If you read about them in early church history, comparisons abound.

I had someone try to teach me tongues one time. He lost me the moment he told me to place my hand on my belly and just start doing it and believe it's the Holy Spirit. I looked him dead in his eyes and said I'm not faking it till I make it, to which he got an attitude and my wife and I left his home and never went back.