CIM Briefing Papers
C.I.M. #55
THE GIFT OF TONGUES
I. Introduction
In a list of the Evangelical church's greatest controversies
of the 20th Century, the gift of tongues would have to be
near the top. This conflict abated somewhat during the mid-
eighties when some leaders of the charismatic movement down-
played the importance of the gift.
The controversy arose over three main questions: Was it a
sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit? Was it essential for
spirituality, and was it a gift to be exercised in today's
church?
There many other difficult questions about the nature of this
gift and we do not labor under the illusion that we are going
to definitively answer questions that have been debated for
decades. Rather, the goal of this briefing is to clarify the
issues: Of what can we be sure, and what areas require
further debate and study?
II. Relevant Scriptural Passages and Linguistic Notes
A. Relevant Passages: Old Testament: Num. 11:25; I Sam.
19:19-24; Isaiah 28:11-12; Joel 2:28. New Testament:
Mk.16:17; Acts 2:4-16; 10:46; 19:6; Rom. 8:26; I Cor.
12-14.
B. Linguistic Notes: The Greek word used in the New
Testament for "tongue" is glossa. It is used in three
ways: (1) as the physical organ (see the Epistle of
James), (2) to describe something shaped like a tongue
(Acts 2:3), and (3), to mean "language" or "dialect."
In Acts 2, the greek word dialectos is used as a
synonym. The word glossa is used 48 times in the NT.
Paul uses it 23 times in his writings, 20 of which are
found in the I Corinthian passage. Phona, another word
used in I Cor. 14:10 has as its primary meaning, "sound"
or "noise," but in this passage it has the secondary
meaning of "languages." Hence it too is a synonym of
glossa.
III. Historical Background of the I Corinthian Passage
A. There was much controversy in the Corinthian church
over several matters, one of which was the use of
certain spiritual gifts (ton pneumatikon: literally,
"the spirituals"). Apparently the main problem
centered around the exercising of the gift of tongues.
A letter was written to Paul while he was at Ephesus
with questions seeking his apostolic authority (see
7:1). Paul, in his reply, does not inform us of the
questions; we only have his inspired answers. He
begins his discussion about gifts with the phrase "Now
about the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you
to be ignorant..."(12:1). It is left to us to discern
the exact nature of the controversy by carefully
studying the Apostle's instruction.
B. It should be obvious that any historical data
discovered about Corinth and its people will have
important bearing on the accuracy of interpretation of
this difficult passage. One historical note that may
give direction to the tongues debate: Several
varieties of mystery religion, for which Corinth was
famous, were practiced there. Two of these mystery
cults were those of Dionysus and Apollo. They had as
their major focus the practice of religious ecstasy and
glossolalia. One writer describes their ceremony:
"Following the torches as they dipped and swayed in the
darkness, they climbed mountain paths with head thrown
back and eyes glazed, dancing to the beat of the drum
which stirred their blood.... In the state of ekstasis
or enthousiasmos, they abandoned themselves, dancing
wildly... and calling "evoi!" At that moment of
intense rapture they became identified with the god
himself.... They became filled with his spirit and
acquired divine powers."
Peter Hoyle, DELPHI, p. 76.
IV. The Nature of the Gift
A. The possibilities
There is no unanimity among scholars about the nature of
the gift largely because what is described in I
Corinthians seems to be different from what occurred at
Pentecost in Acts 2. Most agree with virtual certainty
that the "tongues" in Acts 2 was the supernatural
ability to speak a known human language one had never
learned. The situation was thus: God-fearing Jews from
countries all around the Mediterranean basin had made a
pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of
Pentecost and to worship in the temple. While there,
the Holy Spirit fell on the new believers who then spoke
about "the wonders of God" in the various dialects of
the different countries represented by all the pilgrims
(16 regions are mentioned, v. 9-11). Verse 8 seems to
make it certain that they were speaking propositional
truth in known human languages. Also, while it is not
certain, the language of the text (the pronouns) seems
to indicate that it was only the 12 Apostles who were
endowed with the gift (the Apostles were all Galileans,
note v. 7). So, if the "tongues" at Pentecost were real
languages, what exactly was the gift of tongues
discussed by Paul in his first Epistle to the
Corinthians? Was it the same supernatural phenomena
exhibited as a sign to unbelievers, or was it something
else entirely? These are the main possibilities given:
1. The gift of tongues equals the ability to speak
unlearned languages. (Same as at Pentecost)
a. Statement of the position: The phenomenon at
Corinth was the supernatural speaking of known
human languages that the speakers had never
learned. These miraculous occurrences are
exactly the same as the incident at Pentecost
except for the need for the gift of
interpretation (i.e. the gift of translation).
Presumably, translation was necessary because
the languages were not known by the Corinthians.
The problem at Corinth then, according to this
view, is easy to discern. Some who had the gift
were exercising it in an improper way (without
translation, etc.) and for selfish reasons (for
self-edification). Speaking in such a
miraculous manner was intended to be a sign to
unbelievers (v. 22) that the Gospel was for all
peoples. In other words, the Gospel of the New
Covenant is cosmopolitan, and not just for the
Jews, as was the Old Covenant (a.k.a. Mosaic
Covenant). If any unbelievers were visiting the
church at Corinth while the gift of tongues was
being exhibited without translation, the
unbelievers would think the Christians were
quite mad (v. 23).
When this gift was exercised, the very words
came from God. The speaker's intellect was by-
passed. He himself did not know the meaning of
what was spoken until he heard the translation.
And although it by-passed the speaker's mind, it
was assumed that the speaker could stop and
start, or even suppress the gift until the next
meeting. Otherwise the Apostle's instructions
for its use would not make sense (14:26-28).
Robert Gundry says:
"...in normative Christian glossolalia the
speaker was not seized with uncontrollable
excitement, but maintained self-control with the
ability to wait or to keep completely quiet."
(See " `Ecstatic Utterance' (N.E.B.)" JOURNAL
OF THEOLOGICAL STUDIES, Oct. 1966, pp. 299-307.)
When the translation was given, it was the word
of God in much the same sense as the utterance
of one who had the gift of prophecy. Perhaps
only the nature of the content varied. The
"tongue-translation" utterance was more
declaratory, i.e., the wonders of God; prophecy
was more exhortational, e.g., "This is what you
are to do!"). Apparently the person who had
the gift of tongues might also have the gift of
translation (see 14:5,13). (Note: the person
with both gifts does not skip the gift of
tongues as does the prophet, for then there
would be no value to the sign.)
b. Support: (1) Linguistic evidence strongly
supports real language, i.e., the primary
meaning of the word glossa is "language," and
the word for "interpret" (hermenueo) means to
"translate." (2) Communication of propositional
truth is emphasized, hence the need for
translation. (3) A theological argument some
use is that the miracle of Pentecost and gift of
tongues reverses the Babel experience (Gen. 11).
(4) Paul's quotation of Isa. 28: 11-12 (in
14:21ff) makes a strong case for human language.
In this passage Isaiah is prophesying that when
the people hear the foreign tongue of the enemy
(the Assyrians) they will know that his prophesy
of God's judgment is true. (5) Another strong
argument supporting of the position that the
tongues were actual languages, is that Paul
wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians (c.
55 A.D.) before Luke wrote Acts (c. 63 A.D.).
Therefore, Paul, because of his prior
acquaintance with Luke, would not write about a
different phenomena. Note how Luke writes about
Paul's involvement where tongues were spoken in
Acts 19.
c. Problems: (1) According to some, this view
leaves us with too many unanswered questions.
For example, if the gift is given by the Spirit,
why did He not also include the gift of
translation at Corinth if that was necessary?
(2) Also, several references from the passage
(chapter 14) leave us with some doubt that
rational human speech is involved, e.g. 14:2ff.
and v. 9: "So it is with you. Unless you speak
intelligible words with your tongue, how will
anyone know what you are saying?" See also vv.
14 and 18. (3) Some would say that the
incidents of tongues speaking in Acts could be
seen as involuntary acts. An Old Testament
passage in I Sam 19 is also cited as an
involuntary act.
2. Ecstatic utterances
Two Forms:
Note: there is some debate about the definition of
"ecstacy." Some believe the definition centers
around the fact that the utterance (whether a known
human language or not) is an involuntary,
uncontrollable act. Others say the "ecstasy" refers
to the utterance itself which is not human language
but could be either voluntary or involuntary.
a. Involuntary ecstasy:
(1) Statement of the position: This view
understands the gift of tongues to be verbal
sounds and ejaculations that are uttered
involuntarily under the influence of
powerful emotional and religious feeling,
i.e., under the power of the Holy Spirit.
The key word is "involuntary." The sounds
emitted by the gifted may be real human
language, gibberish, or a combination. It
is argued that the three passages in Acts
describe an involuntary act.
(2) Problems:
This phenomena does not seem to fit the
situation in Corinth, mainly because Paul's
regulations limiting the practice of the
gift to 2 or 3 per meeting imply that the
gift can be controlled by the one with the
gift. However, the above description does
seem to fit, at least in some cases, what is
seen today in some congregations witnessed
by this writer and others (I mainly refer to
the fact that it appeared to be uncontrolled
or involuntary). This form of ecstatic
utterance was common in the ancient mystery
religions practiced at Corinth and is still
seen in many animistic religions of today.
Psychologists and anthropologists refer to
it as "altered states."
b. Non-human language ecstasy:
(1) Statement of the position: This form of
ecstatic utterance is comprised of a number
of sequences of sounds that appear to have
the form of language but in fact do not when
examined by linguists. (Research has shown
repeatedly that the practitioner always uses
phonemes of his or her native language.)
This is the view of some versions of the
English Bible, e.g. The New English Bible.
The KJV translators apparently also believed
that the phenomenon at Corinth was ecstatic
utterances in this sense. When the word
glossa appears in the singular they
translated it "unknown tongue," not as in
"unknown language," but as a non-language.
The word "unknown" is not in the original.
The vocalizations according to this position
could be heavenly languages (angelic), or
simply the language of the Holy Spirit. It
is a wholly controllable gift; the speaking
can be stopped or started at will. Since
the gift is not a human language, the gift
of interpretation is not the equivalent of a
translator. For this view the Greek
"hermenuo" means "interpret," as one would a
dream or a parable. This also meets the
description of what can be presently
witnessed in many charismatic churches, i.e.
they do not appear to be human languages and
in many cases they are exercised
voluntarily.
(2) Support: (a) Ultimately those who hold this
view are deeply influenced by the English
translations which render "glossa" as
"unknown tongue." (b) Others argue that
Paul is referring to unknown tongues or non-
human language in 13:1 when he says, "If I
speak in the tongues of men and of angels...
." (b) It matches the experiences of many
believers today. (c) Many verses in I Cor.
14 seem to demand non-language utterances,
e.g., 14:2,14,15,18,19.
(3) Problems: (a) It ignores the strong
linguistic evidence mentioned earlier about
the definitions of "glossa" and "hermenueo."
(b) It downplays, though does not totally
deny that the main purpose of the gift is to
communicate some truth. (c) It also
downplays the purpose of the gift which was
a sign to unbelievers. It is hard to see
how unbelievers would be impressed had the
sign not been real languages the speaker had
never learned. This problem is heightened
by the fact that Paul warns that unbelievers
would conclude they were mad. (d) In 13:1,
note that Paul also says he speaks with the
tongues of men! But what is even more
likely, the greek indicates that Paul is
speaking hypothetically. Note the same
hypothetical argument in the following
verses. He does not actually know all
mysteries nor did he actually give his body
to be burned.
3. A language of prayer
a. Statement of the position: This view is similar
to the previous view in that the gift is not an
actual known human language. Rather, the
emphasis is on the gift as a personal aid to
worship whereby one prays to God in the spirit
without going through the intellect. It is a
prayer given by the Spirit through the human
spirit. The sounds made by the gifted can be
non-language sounds (no actual words, grammar or
syntax) or the language of angels or the Holy
Spirit. The position is based on the following
passages: Rom. 8:26 "--...We do not know what we
ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself
intercedes for us with groans that words cannot
express;" I Cor 4:2a--"For anyone who speaks in
a tongue does not speak to men but to God"; I
Cor. 14:14ff--"If I pray in a tongue...."
b. Problems: (1) This seems to completely violate
Paul's argument about the public purpose of the
gift in that the gifts are to build up the Body
and are for a sign to unbelieving observers.
(2) The Romans passage does not clearly support
this view. One of the key words in the passage
is only used here, and is difficult to define.
On the other hand, this passage clearly teaches
that the Holy Spirit helps all Christians pray,
not just those who have the gift of tongues.
(3) In I Cor. 14:2 where Paul says "For anyone
who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but
to God" could be referring to one who speaks
without a translator. (4) This version of the
gift is very frequently observed today in public
worship services during prayer times where many
worshipers (both men and women) pray audibly and
simultaneously. This certainly seems to violate
Paul's clear instructions for use. (4) It is
rather strange if praying in tongues is to be
the norm for Christians that Christ himself did
not instruct His disciples to pray this way.
4. A coded message
a. Statement of the position: Taking the cue from
computer language, a more recent view is that
the gift may have involved utterances that did
not have the characteristics of human language,
but nevertheless could communicate cognitive
content in a code much as a computer program.
This view arose from an attempt to understand
the modern phenomena of speaking in tongues,
which in the light of scientific studies,
indicated a non-language phenomena, but still
wished to adhere to the dictum that the gift
involved a rational communication of content.
Hence the gift involves speaking in audible
sounds that are unlike any known human language
that are induced by the Holy Spirit to
communicate a message that then can be de-coded
by the one with the gift of interpretation.
b. Problems: (a) It fails to fully account for the
linguistic evidence ("glossa") and it sees
"hermenueo" in the unlikely sense of
interpreting a dream or parable. (b) Perhaps
the major defect is it downgrades the gift as
sign in our estimation. (c) It seems unlikely
that Paul would speak of ten thousand words in a
tongue (v.19) if he had in view speech that was
encoded and not verbal.
5. Pseudo Tongues
a. Statement of the position: The genuine gift of
tongues involved the speaking in known human
languages (i.e., cognitive communication) that
one had never learned (as in view #1) as a sign
to unbelievers, but at Corinth, those
worshipping in the church were speaking
ecstatically as in the pagan mystery religions
(i.e., involuntarily and/or non-linguistically).
Speaking in this manner had become a matter of
spiritual pride as was also true of the
practitioners of the mystery religions. It was
an experience sought for its own sake. Paul
teaches that the Christian gifts are for
edification of others and his exhortation and
rules for regulation are his way of curbing the
practice.
b. Support: (a) Those who hold this view claim
there are numerous allusions in the Corinthian
passage to the practice of the mystery
religions. Examples given are: (1) In I Cor.
2:10--3:4, Paul contrasts the one who has the
Spirit, i.e., the "spiritual one"
("pneumatikos") with the one devoid of the
Spirit ("psukikos"). In the mystery religions
to have a manifestation of "the spirit" was
extra-ordinary; it was a peak experience,
whereas Paul teaches that in the Christian way,
the spirit is always present and abiding. (2)
In I Cor. 12:2,3, Paul gives two sources of
spiritual utterances, one evil and one good.
Paul seems to be implying that the immature
Corinthians were not always perceptive as to the
source. (3) In I Cor. 13:1, Paul says the
ability to speak with tongues of men and angels
without love is no better than being a
"resounding gong" or a "clanging cymbal." Both
of these instruments were used in the mystery
religions to produce the emotional intoxication
needed to experience the sacred. (4) In 14:2,
Paul says "one who speaks in a tongue...speaks
mysteries." It is asserted that here Paul is
alluding to the pagan mysteries and should not
be viewed as being a commendation from the
Apostle. (5) Women were not only prominent in
the mystery cult ritual but were very emotional
and vocal according to historical sources
(Strabo). Since the early church largely
followed the pattern of synagogue worship where
men led in worship Paul may be counteracting
this practice in I Cor 14:33ff. (6) In I Cor.
14:12, the NIV says, "Since you are eager to
have spiritual gifts try to excel in gifts that
build up the church." The Greek, however, says
more literally "Since you are zealous for the
spirits...." The meaning, in context of their
religious past, may be: "Since you have such a
strong inclination toward spiritual things (or
the mystical)... ." (7) "Speaking in tongues"
was a well known practice in antiquity. The
same phrase that Paul uses in the Greek "glossai
lalein" is found in non-biblical sources. Wayne
House says: "Possibly the carnal Corinthians,
recent converts from pagan religions, were
failing to distinguish between the ecstatic
utterance of their past and the true gift of
tongues given supernaturally by the Holy Spirit"
(p.142). Charles Smith forcibly adds to this
position: "If speaking in tongues involved a
supernatural speech in a real language, then
every such utterance required a direct miracle
by God. This would mean, in the case of the
Corinthians, that God was working a miracle at
the wrong time and wrong place! He was causing
that which He was directing the Apostle to
curtail" (p.26).
c. Problems: This view seems to have the fewest
difficulties, but in spite of this, it is not
accepted by a consensus of scholars. Those who
disagree with the above, generally give these
lines of rebuttal: (1) The linguistic arguments
are not unassailable. For example, Paul's use
of "mysteries" in I Cor 14:2, does not have the
sense given above (i.e., pagan mysteries). And
in I Cor. 14:12, the plural "pnuematon" is
translated by all english versions as spiritual
gifts, meaning the Corinthians were zealous for
spiritual gifts. (2) If the Corinthian
experience mimics the pagan experience it seems
strange that Paul does not outright condemn it.
Rather, at a minimum, he seems to condone the
practice as long as it is done with the proper
decorum or outside the church service.
6. The Composite View
a. Statement of the Position: This view holds that
the "glossalia" phenomenon, or the gift of
tongues, is a combination of the supernatural
speaking of languages not learned, and non-
linguistic utterances. It is believed that this
occurred at Pentecost. The participants spoke
ecstatically (non-language), but also
intermittently spoke of "the wonders of God" in
the many dialects present at Pentecost. It is
further argued that this form of glossalia was
also practiced at Corinth but with the wrong
emphasis necessitating Paul's regulations.
b. Support: (1) They find linguistic support for
this broad use of the term "glossalia" in the
pagan literature (Plato). (2) It explains why
the crowd thought the believers were drunk at
Pentecost (2:13). (3) It resolves the apparent
difficulties in the Corinthian passage if the
broad view is adapted. According to this view,
the main problem is the lack of interpretation
of the known language utterances in the worship
and the lack of order in the services. For many
who hold this view it is not inappropriate to
exercise this gift without interpretation
privately whether it be language or non-
language. Indeed Paul seems to encourage this
use of the gift in private by using himself as
an example (V. 18): "I thank God that I speak
in tongues more than all of you. But in the
church...."
c. Problems: While this view has something to
offer, in our opinion it seems forced and guilty
of special pleading. (1) The linguistic
evidence cited is not conclusive. (2) It is
just as easy to see how the believers at
Pentecost could be assumed drunk if they were
loud and animated. (3) The difficult passages
in I Cor. 14 that seem to indicate non-language
speaking are open to viable alternate
interpretation. See for example the works
listed by Gaffin and Clowney.
B. Summary
Some of the above positions are more defensible than
others. However, none alleviate all questions; none are
unassailable. The above positions can generally be
reduced to two approaches:
1. Views that see the Holy Spirit as originating the
speech and using the human voice box to communicate
a message which bypasses the mind of the speaker.
This approach emphasizes the supernatural quality of
the event and its value as a sign to unbelievers.
Generally those in this camp conclude that this
spectacular gift ceased sometime in the First
Century (cessationism).
2. Views that see the speech directed toward God as
prayer or praise. The Holy Spirit vocalizes in the
form of tongues (generally non-human language) some
preconceptual or non-intellectual aspect of man. It
originates in the human spirit but bypasses the mind
of the speaker. Only God and the one with the gift
of interpretation know the content. "Tongues enable
one to express concerns resident in the deepest
recesses of his being, concerns otherwise suppressed
and inhibited by the superficialities of
conceptualization and conventional language"
(Gaffin, p.73). Those who come from this approach
generally believe the gift is for the church today
(non-cessationism) and the primary emphasis is for
worship, either in public or private.
V. The Purpose of the Gift
Possibilities:
A. To bridge the communication gap: The purpose being to
rapidly spread the gospel without the missionaries
having to spend years learning the language. There
appears to be no basis for this view in the Scriptures.
At Pentecost the Jews visiting Palestine all understood
Peter's sermon (probably in Aramaic). (Missionaries
would love for this to be the case! There are
unsubstantiated stories of believers supernaturally
preaching the gospel or praying for the lost [in their
presence] in an unlearned language.)
B. A sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit: This is the
view held by a large number of older charismatic
denominations. The view largely comes from the passages
in Acts, particularly chapter 19, where speaking in
tongues immediately follows the receiving of the baptism
of the Holy spirit with the laying on of hands by the
Apostle Paul. In this theological circle it is often
common to see no distinction between the "filling of the
Holy Spirit," and the "baptism of the Holy Spirit."
However, the clear teaching of I Cor. 12:13, is that all
believers are baptized by the Spirit at the moment of
conversion. It is an act that unites all races into One
Body; it puts all believers in Christ. It is important
to note that this verse was given to a group (the
Corinthians) which included many carnal Christians. The
"filling" of the Holy Spirit has to do with His control
over the life of the believer (Eph. 5:18) and produces
in the believer the Fruit of the Spirit.
C. A sign to unbelieving Jews: I Cor. 14:22 says, "Tongues
then, are a sign, not for believers but for
unbelievers;"... . The preceding context, which is a
quote from Isa. 28:11,12 seems to strongly imply that
this is a reference to a time when God pronounced
judgement on the nation of Israel. When Israel mocks
Isaiah for the seemingly simple repetitious message, God
blasts them by informing them that God's speaking to
them will be through stammerings and an unrecognizable
tongue. In 701 B.C. the Jews were awakened from their
sleep by the "babble" of Assyrian. Again in 609 B.C.
they heard the Babylonian dialect. These Gentiles
speaking in the midst of, and in authority over the Jews
was evidence of God's judgement fulfilled; His hand of
blessing was off of them, at least for the time being
while they were being judged. The same is true of the
evil generation of Christ's and the Apostles' day.
Hearing foreign tongues being spoken at the temple mount
was highlighted by Peter's use of Isaiah to point out
God's judgement on unbelieving Israel. Note the phrase
"this people" in v.21. The argument goes back to
Pentecost where Jews first were confronted with the sign
of tongues and again in Acts 10 and 19, the gift was
given as a sign to Jews that gentiles are included in
the New Covenant. Note that in Acts 18:1,5, Paul
addressed some Jews in Corinth about the claims of
Christ. Paul, though an Apostle to the Gentiles, always
made it a practice when visiting a new area, to first
address the Jews. It may be under these circumstances
that Paul himself spoke in tongues as he confessed he
did many times (See I Cor. 14:18). This view is further
confirmed when the writer of Hebrews, addressing Jews
says: "...how shall we escape if we ignore such a great
salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by
the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.
God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various
miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed
according to his will." (Heb. 2:3,4). This verse would
appear to give strong support. The sign then was to
authenticate God's message and activity. It gave
authority to the Apostles' message of the progress in
God's plan of redemption. There is now a new covenant
brought about by the work of Christ, and it is
cosmopolitan in that it is for all peoples, Jew and
Gentile. See also these related passages: I Cor. 1:22;
and II Cor. 12:12
D. As an apologetic or sign to unbelievers in general: By
its supernatural nature it would seem logical to
conclude that this gift would be used by the Holy Spirit
to convict even lost Gentiles. Whether Jews or
Gentiles, there definitely were unbelievers in
attendance at Corinthian worship services. This is made
clear in 14:16,22-24 where the Greek word "idiotes" is
used. In this context it had the idea of anyone who had
not been initiated into membership. Some specify that
it was only a sign gift to unbelievers (Jew or Gentile)
when uninterpreted and exercised in a non-church
situation. When experienced in the church, however, it
had to be interpreted and was then for the purpose of
edification (See Hoehner, p.59ff.).
E. As revelation and for edification: Some see tongues and
prophesy as sister gifts with the only difference being
the fact that tongues must be interpreted. The message
is seen as a revelation from God.
F. A type of prayer used in worship: It is argued that
this is taught in 14:2,4,14-17.
G. A sign of spirituality: This must have been part of the
problem with tongues-speaking at Corinth. The
believers, described by Paul as immature and carnal,
mistakenly thought speaking in tongues was a sign of
spirituality. It was much-sought after and had become a
matter of pride. Charismatic groups today almost
universally reject the notion that tongues are a sign of
advanced spirituality. However, the implication is
often there.
VI. Rules for the Practice of the Gift
In any discussion of Paul's rules for the practice of the
gift of tongues one can safely assume from the text itself
that something was amiss in the Corinthian church with regard
to this gift, as it is the major subject of I Cor 12-14. The
Corinthians had apparently misconstrued the importance of the
gift and were practicing it in such a way that brought chaos
to the worship services. Their witness to honest inquirers
was at stake. We can safely assume the above because Paul
teaches them that, compared to the other gifts, tongues are
not as important. Apparently, as in the native mystery
religions, tongues were being elevated as the supreme
religious experience. Paul teaches that this violates the
foundation with which all the gifts are to be exercised: in
love and for the building up of the body. It is also
apparent that many were speaking in tongues simultaneously
without the utterances ever being interpreted. Women may
have been dominating in the speaking, as also happened in the
mystery religions. Therefore, Paul, because God is a God of
order, gives regulations for the practice to curb their
excesses. His rules are as follows:
A. No more than 2 or 3 (apparently men) are to speak at a
single meeting. V.27. This regulation only makes sense
in the light of v.32 which says " The spirits of prophets
are subject to the control of prophets."
B. They are to exercise the gift consecutively. V.27
C. Someone with the gift of translation must be present to
translate (or interpret) each message. V.27.
D. Women were to be silent. The problem here is the passage
in I Cor. 11:5, where Paul does permit women to speak
("prophesy") though with a head-covering. This is
another enigmatic passage in I Corinthians that may have
some cultural explanation. Women deeply involved in the
mystery religions often shaved their heads. The head-
covering mandate may have had something to do with this
practice.
E. The practice of tongues, however one conceives it, is not
to be banned at Corinth. V.39.
F. Order must prevail in the worship service. V.40.
VII. The Duration of the Gift
Perhaps the only question more perplexing than the nature
of the gift is the duration of the gift. Is the gift of
tongues for today's church? There two conflicting answers:
A. Cessationism: This view says the supernatural gifts
were for signs in the early church and are therefore
not necessary for today's church. Their argument is
based on texts having to do with signs, e.g., Heb.
2:3,4, and I Cor. 13:8 ("where there are tongues, they
will be stilled"), theological arguments, and the fact
that the supernatural gift of tongues (as they conceive
it) is not seen today and has not been seen since the
First Century.
B. Non-cessationism: This view, which sees the purpose of
the gift of tongues as a prayer to God and as an aid to
worship believes the gift is for today's church. They
would cite verses in I Cor. 14, which seem to indicate
their premise that it is a prayer to God and that it
can be practiced in private. They would argue that
Paul strongly urged that the gift not be suppressed
(v.39). If it was important then, why not today? In
addition, they would appeal to experience.
C. The Problem: Neither side has a clear mandate from
Scripture. Both sides appeal to experience which by
itself is not sufficient to establish a doctrine.
Actually, the former appeals to a lack of experience,
which is nevertheless an argument from experience!
(Note: the issue of cessationism vs. non-cessationism
will be dealt with in more detail in a subsequent
briefing.)
VIII. Concluding Observations
A. What is clear
1. The gift of tongues was meant to communicate
content.
2. Paul's rules for use are mandatory if exercised in
worship services.
3. It can be controlled by the person receiving the
gift.
4. Tongues should never be the basis or grounds for
Christian fellowship.
5. The exercise of the gift is not a sign of
spirituality, the baptism, or the filling of the
Holy Spirit.
B. What is unclear (where there is need for more debate)
1. The source of the content: is it God speaking, or
is the source the Human spirit? In essence, it is
a question about the exact nature and purpose of
the gift.
2. Whether or not the gift is for personal
edification, e.g., in private devotion?
3. Its importance: It receives scant mention in the
NT outside of the Corinthian passage (only in Acts
and in the ending of Mark 16 which may not have
been included in the earliest manuscripts), yet
Paul seems to put it on par with prophesy when
properly exercised with an interpreter.
4. Whether or not women should exercise the gift in
church.
5. Is it a legitimate gift for today? Should
believers seek it?
For Further Study:
Blomberg, Craig L. NIV APPLICATION COMMENTARY: I CORINTHIANS.
Carson, D.A. SHOWING THE SPIRIT: A THEOLOGICAL EXPOSITION OF I
CORINTHIANS 12-14.
Clowney, Edmund P. THE CHURCH. See Chapter 16.
Fee, Gordon D. THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Fee, Gordon D. GOD'S EMPOWERING PRESENCE: THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE
LETTERS OF PAUL. See pp. 146-261.
Gaffin, Richard B. Jr. PERSPECTIVES ON PENTECOST.
Grudem, Wayne. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. See pp. 1016-1087.
Hoehner, Harold W. "The Purpose of Tongues in I Corinthians
14:20-25. In " WALVOORD: A
TRIBUTE.
House, H. Wayne "Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth."
in BIBLIOTHECA SACRA, vol, 140. pp.134-150.
MacArthur, John F. Jr. CHARISMATIC CHAOS.
Smith, Charles R. TONGUES IN BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE.
Witherington. Ben, III. CONFLICT AND COMMUNITY IN CORINTH.
Christian Information Ministries is a non-profit ministry and is
dependent on gifts from God's people in order to operate. If you
receive a benefit from our materials would you consider giving a
tax-deductible gift to CIM. We suggest $25. a year minimum.
Send to: Christian Information Ministries
2050 N. Collins Blvd. #100
Richardson, TX 75080
 |
RAPID RESPONSE REPORT |
| BRIEFING PAPERS |
| BIBLIOGRAPHIES |
| MOVIE & BOOK REVIEWS |
| TECHNICAL PAPERS | | ARARAT REPORTS |
| CONTACT US |
| OUR STAFF |
| CIM HOME |
Do you want a printer friendly version of this paper?
Select your format below
