By Mark W. Christy, PhD
Much debate within the Evangelical community exists over the viability of tongues in the Post-Apostolic Church. In Mark 16:17-18, Jesus offers a list of miraculous events that will accompany saving belief, and one of those included was the gift of “new tongues.”[i] Within this passage however, Jesus offers basically no detail to describe the exact nature of this gift. Were these “new tongues” some sort of new language or utterance that surpasses the ability of humans to comprehend? Was this gift normative for all Christians or for a select group in a given period of Church history? In this article, an attempt will be made to answer these questions from various passages in the New Testament (NT).
On the Day of Pentecost, Luke records that “they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance” (Acts 2:4). In this verse, the “all” who “began to speak with other tongues” were either the Apostles (1:26), or even more likely, the first believers who had gathered to await the Spirit’s coming (2:1). Nevertheless, these believers were divinely enabled to speak in another tongue, but were their utterances ecstatic or actual human languages?[ii]
In Acts 2:6-11, Luke makes the answer certain when he notes that members of the crowd heard “them speak in his own language.” This initial display of the gift of tongues was a case of xenologia (speaking in human languages) as opposed to glossolalia (speaking in ecstatic utterance). Given this, one must ask whether or not the normative for Early Apostolic Church in Acts in regard to the gift of tongues was the speaking in real human languages.
The next mention of tongues in Acts occurs 10:44-46 when Peter preached the gospel to a Gentile audience who then received the gift of tongues. While it is less than clear on the surface, Luke does note the Jewish Christians (“the circumcised believers”) who were present with Peter were surprised that this gift “had been poured out on the Gentiles also.” Their recognition of the Spirit’s work suggests that this gift of tongues was no different than the gift they themselves received in Acts 2.
The final place where Luke discusses the gift of tongues is in Acts 19:6. Unfortunately, the context of this verse leaves the question of whether these tongues were intelligible or some sort of Spirit-empowered gibberish open. Given this, normal rules for interpretation would force the reader to return to the clear rendering of tongues as xenologia in Acts 2.
Outside of Acts, the only other place in the NT where ‘speaking in tongues’ is mentioned is in First Corinthians, but before looking at those passages, it may help to first consider the timeline behind the events in Acts where this gift is mentioned along with the dating of Corinthians. As previously mentioned, the first manifestation of the gifts of tongues happened at Pentecost in Acts 2, and this event can be dated to around AD 30. The next mention in Acts 10:46 likely occurred around AD 39-40. The final mention of this gift by Luke in Acts 19:6 dates to around AD 53.
As has been noted, Paul makes a final addition to this NT discussion in 1 Corinthians which was penned around AD 55. At this point in NT history, the only other NT works available were James (AD 45), Galatians (AD 49), Matthew (AD 50), First Thessalonians (AD 51), and Second Thessalonians (AD 52). After AD 55 on the NT timeline, the gift of tongues ceases to be mentioned. Whether or not this should serve as evidence of the cessation of tongues in the present era will be discussed at a later point in this article. For now, attention will be given to the theology of tongues developed in First Corinthians.
In First Corinthians 12:8-10, Paul offers a list of highly visible spiritual gifts with the Church including wisdom, knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, miracles, prophecy, the testing of prophetic utterances (see endnote), tongues, and interpretation of tongues.[iii] On the surface, Paul offers little to no clarity as to whether tongues are to be understood as intelligible human languages or some sort of mystical utterance that arises from outside human discourse. Even so, careful analysis does at least offer a few clues.
The first clue is the mention of kinds of tongues alongside the interpretation of these tongues (1 Cor 12:10). This point is re-emphasized by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:28. From this, it seems that kinds of languages was an assortment of intelligible languages that could be differentiated into particular kinds/groups and then interpreted by whoever had been gifted to do so.
After mentioning once again that not all have the gift of tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:30 (a point which was also taught in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11), Paul raises the subject again in 13:1 where he hypothetically begins his discussion with the phrase, “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels.” It is possible that he may be speaking in a hyperbolic or idiomatic way so as to introduce his main point about the primacy of love above all things, including the gift of tongues, which was so obviously prized among the Corinthians (see especially 1 Corinthians 14). This, however, may not be the case because Paul had seen the third heaven and heard things he could not as human put into words (2 Cor 12:1-4). While he recounts the inexpressibility of what he heard, it does seem likely that he heard a celestial language. If this is the case, Paul is simply adding a celestial kind of language to the other kinds already alluded to in 1 Corinthians 12.
In 13:8-12, Paul instructs the Corinthians on the permanence of love as opposed to that of the spiritual gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues. David E. Garland observes that “these gifts relate to what Christians do in this world” and their usefulness will expire when Christians are united with Christ at the Second Coming.[iv] Whatever the tongues were that had been gifted to the Corinthian Christians, they were not heavenly or eternal in nature and therefore would cease at some point (13:8). These tongues, therefore, cannot be directly associated with the celestial language employed by angels as mentioned in 13:1.
In 1 Corinthians 14:2, Paul writes, “For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.” Without careful deliberation, it may seem that what Paul is now referring to “is not a language of normal human discourse, but something mysterious.”[v] This understanding fails to consider several contextual clues. First, Paul is continuing his discussion on spiritual gifts which began 1 Corinthians 12 (cf. 1 Cor 14:1). Second, his list of spiritual gifts in that same chapter include the gift of interpretation of tongues, and anyone with this gift could most certainly discern the meaning of the utterances of one employing the gift of tongues.
Despite the two broader contextual clues, Carson asserts that reducing Paul’s meaning in 14:2 to intelligible human languages instead of mysteries only discernible by God “is barely possible.”[vi] He supports his stance by appealing to the first part of 14:2 where Paul distinguishes between speaking to men and speaking to God, and explicitly notes that ‘tongues’ are spoken to God. Based on Paul’s comments in v.4 where he remarks that “[o]ne who speaks in a tongue edifies himself,” Carson believes that Paul in v.2 is discussing mysteries spoken by one with the gift of tongues which are discernible to the one speaking and to God alone. If he is correct, and the context does indeed suggest that he is at this point, this does not preclude the interpretation that the tongues spoken of as “mysteries” in v.2 can be discerned by a gifted interpreter.
While this area of contention will no doubt remain, the context does reveal that Paul’s chief concern over the employment of ‘tongues’ is their intelligibility if they are to be evidenced within the assembly which has been gathered for worship. Paul asserts prophecy over tongues in the assembly because the “one who prophesies edifies the church” (v.4). Paul was concerned about the ability of the Christians in Corinth to discern the truth being spoken: “unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken?” (v.9).
If one assumes that intelligible mysteries are being rendered in a tongue that can been interpreted by one gifted to do so, the meaning of 1 Corinthians 14:2 can be restricted to intelligible discourse not unlike prophecy (except that an interpreter becomes necessary). In this verse, Paul does indeed state that God is the audience of the one speaking in tongues as people in general have not been divinely enabled to understand. Nevertheless, they can understand when a divinely gifted interpreter of tongues renders assistance and by doing so turns the mysterious into the discernible.
While Paul may have understood the gift of tongues to involve intelligible languages, the context of 14:2 does seem to show that some Corinthian Christians thought otherwise. In this part of his argument, Paul is intentionally restricting his broader discussion on spiritual gifts to just two, prophecy and tongues. While he never states it emphatically, the context strongly suggests that the Corinthians had been prioritizing unintelligible discourse in the forms of uninterpreted tongues over intelligible prophetic messages in the language of the hearers.
As it has been alluded to, throughout 1 Corinthians 14 Paul portrays the tongues gift as a communication of men meant solely for God at least in the sense that only God Himself can discern the meaning apart from a Spirit-empowered interpreter. In v.14, he puts it this way, “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.” By this, Paul is saying that any communication in ‘tongues’ is communication with the divine, and such communication offers no profit to the communicator. In vv.16-17, he broadens his point to demonstrate that such communication which is fruitless to the mind of the one communicating in tongues is also fruitless to the minds of others when offered in the assembly apart from interpretation.
In v.21, Paul takes his argumentation on the tongues gift in a completely different direction. Quoting from Isaiah 28:11, he writes, “’By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me,’ says the Lord” (1 Corinthians 14:21). In the context of Isaiah, God would be sending His judgement upon His unfaithful people via the Assyrians. When the time of the invasion was to arrive, God’s people would be given the sign of unintelligible language due their unbelief. This language, though intelligible to the Assyrians who would be speaking it and God of course, would serve as a sign of judgement against the unbelieving Jews who did not speak it. Following this line of reasoning, Paul concludes in v.22 that “tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.”
Since the corporate worship of the Church is a time for believers to gather, it only makes sense, following Paul’s logic, that prophecy be the medium of communication from God to people via a human instrument. Given the Church exists in time of grace when the gospel is to be declared to all of the world, it also seems right that the message of the cross be given as a blessing by speaking in intelligible discourse as opposed to ‘strange tongues’ which would be more akin to judgement as in Isaiah 28:11. Expressing his deep concern for these unbelieving church attenders and their need to hear and understand the teachings of the Church, Paul says in vv.23-25, “Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.”
In v.23, Paul is only offering a hypothetical example of all believers speaking in tongues. He has already made in clear in 1 Corinthians 12 that while all believers have at least one spiritual gift not all of them have the gift of tongues. With this in view, Paul does not mean to imply that all believers have the tongues gifting. While this seems certain, his teaching on the absurdity of all people attempting to speak in tongues in the corporate worship in Corinth suggests that the Corinthian Christians had been doing just that. If this is the case (as it is among many charismatic churches today), then it quite likely that many if not most of these Christians were speaking in tongues in pure emotional hysteria apart from any gifting of the Spirit. If this is so (and once again this can indeed be witnessed in many charismatic churches today), then is also quite likely that even those who had the tongues gifting were caught up in the rampant emotionalism for several reasons. First, it seems unlikely that the Holy Spirit would supernaturally empower believers to exercise their gift in such a way that their usage was not edifying and in line with the heart of God. Second, it does not seem likely that the Spirit’s gifting could be implied in such a way that a sort of justified mockery, as noted by Paul in v.23, would arise against its usage.
In v.24, Paul reveals the purpose of Church assembly in regard to the unbelieving attender. In an indirect way, he has already rejected the sort of judgement sent by God upon the unbelieving Jews in the time of the Assyrian invasion. Even so, the Church, according to Paul, still serves as a messenger of judgement, but their work as messenger is more like that of Isaiah who warns the unbelieving Jews than the Assyrians who were to be sent to enact God’s destructive/condemning judgement. For this reason, Paul tells the Corinthians to employ prophecy as the mode of teaching in the assembly so as to bring conviction of sin upon the unbelieving attenders.
For those churches still desiring to allow for tongues in their corporate worship, Paul imposes three limitations upon the activity in 14:27. At most he commands, only two or three can employ their tongue gifting in a given service. When they do, they should exercise self-control by taking turns and only speak when a qualified interpreter is present to render assistance. These expectations demonstrate that Paul expects orderliness among those using tongues and not the sort of ecstatic emotionalism common to many charismatic gatherings of today.
At this point in the discussion, it would seem reasonable to conclude that at least some Christians in the NT Church had the gifts of tongues. In addition, the tongues in which they spoke were intelligible languages that could be understand by whatever linguistic community they were associated with. Beyond these two remarks, it should be understood that those who exercised their gift, at least in the corporate assembly of the faithful, should do so only when a gifted interpreter was present. With these considerations in mind, it is now time to consider whether or not the gift of tongues is still being distributed to believers within the contemporary Church.
As has been mentioned, many charismatic churches still affirm the presence of the tongues gifting. Despite this, it rare to see any effort made to interpret something said in tongues. Among those charismatic churches that do offer interpretations, one will be hard-pressed to find a way to verify the veracity of any such interpretations. That such verification is not unwarranted can be seen from comments like the following from Carson:
“A few years ago a friend of mine attended a charismatic service and rather cheekily recited some of John 1:1–18 in Greek as his contribution to speaking in tongues. Immediately there was an “interpretation” that bore no relation whatsoever to the Johannine prologue. Two people with the gift of interpretation have on occasion been asked to interpret the same recorded tongues message and the resulting different and conflicting interpretations have been justified on the grounds that God gives different interpretations to different people. That is preposterous, if the interpretations are wildly dissimilar, because it would force us to conclude that there is no univocal, cognitive content to the tongues themselves.”[vii]
Given the difficulty of determining verifiable evidence for the contemporary presence of the gifts of tongues and interpretation of tongues, one must consider whether or not these gifts are still active in the Church. While the charismatics continue to affirm their presence and the Scriptures do indeed attest to their presence in the Apostolic era, there is some evidence to suggest that these gifts were meant only for that period. First, as has been mentioned, the NT discussion on gifts ends in First Corinthians, which is relatively early in the NT timeline. Since this means NT writers remained silent on this topic for approximately 40-50 years of the NT timeline (when the other NT works were being written) after Paul penned First Corinthians, it does seem at least plausible that these gifts may have died out by the end of the Apostolic era.
Second, the overtly miraculous nature of the tongues gift (and the gifts of interpretation of tongues, miracles, and healing) aligns with other points in biblical history where God’s miraculous powers were put on public display to testify to the authenticity of a new message from God and promote belief. For Moses, he was sent to perform miracles before Pharoah (Ex 4:1-8). Elijah was given miracles to demonstrate the divine origin of his message to Ahab (1 Kgs 17:1; 18:24). Jesus’ public ministry was constantly awash in miraculous wonders (John 2:11). After Pentecost, the apostles also were given miracles to publicly authenticate the gospel (Acts 4:10, 16).
Third, the final evidence for the cessation of tongues is the overall lack of attestation to the gift still being active during the period of the Early Church fathers. Since the many writings are largely mum on the subject, one cannot help but assume that tongues were no longer a part of church life. Beyond these three points of argumentation in support of cessation, no further (acceptable) evidence exists to support the cessationists’ claims. Despite this, the lack of utility of this gift in the corporate assembly, the current difficulty in finding qualified interpreters, and Paul’s concern that prophecy be given primacy all highly suggest that tongues should be confined to the Apostolic era.
In conclusion, NT references about the tongues gifting seem to refer primarily if not exclusively to an intelligible language. While it does seem that Paul was expressing concern with some believers who may have been speaking either unintelligible languages or languages that were simply unintelligible due to the dearth of interpreters 1 Corinthians 14, his overall message was the promotion of intelligible and productive discourse that aids the mind in the proper understanding of the gospel. His de-emphasis of the corporate value of tongues in the absence of qualified interpreters together with seeming lack of this gift’s presence in the latter part of the Apostolic era and beyond gives strong evidence that this gifting is no longer active in the Church since that period.
[i]All Scripture references are taken from NASB1995.
[ii]D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 (Great Britain: Cox and Wyman, 1987), 152-53. Carson takes the position that “all of them” refers to the entire early Christian community that had formed to await the coming of the Spirit. Despite this, he acknowledges that it is possible that “all of them” does not necessarily include every single individual and that is could be a more general way of saying that many of them spoke in tongues.
[iii]At this point in the NT timeline, the NT canon was still decades from completion. For this reason, Christians would take turns prophesying to the church. The prophesies, however, were not viewed as Holy Writ. Rather, they were to be carefully examined to ensure that they were indeed inspired by the Spirit. In this passage, Paul is demonstrating that some members had been divinely gifted to accurately discern whether or not these prophetic utterances were indeed from the Holy Spirit (see “Interpreting the Pauline Directive That Women Should Be Silent in Church,” available at: https://battlehardenedbeliever.com/?p=2203.
[iv]David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, in Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2003), 621-22.
[v]Ibid., 584.
[vi]Carson, Showing the Spirit, 104.
[vii]Ibid., 87.