“Purpose-ism” is something that would be germane here, if there is even such an -ism.
The proper theme of the story is the love of Christ in bearing sins and regenerating to righteousness.
The bible is clear about the main way that tongues make sense in this scheme — as a witness to an unbelieving speaker of the language. They still could, never say never, but the circumstances are much more rare than they used to be. If one wanted to call this cessation, one could.
Could they serve a decorative purpose too? Maybe... and much is made by certain charismatics about things like tongues of angels which would have normally have no earthly speaker... but it’s wrong to assign an excessive importance to such a role. The purpose they serve today would mostly be decorative.
Could one lose a reward by ascribing too much importance to such a gift? Possibly. It could distract from carrying out more important gospel affairs that would gain a reward. This isn’t loss of salvation or going to hell, however. This is losing a chance to earn a better circumstance in heaven. A risk that all Christians run.
We should judge as charitably as we would hope ourselves to be judged. Doing otherwise will make it look like it’s all about what we think, rather than all about what we know that God can do.
“We should judge as charitably as we would hope ourselves to be judged. Doing otherwise will make it look like it’s all about what we think, rather than all about what we know that God can do.”
Well, it’s hard for me to judge the phenomenon charitably when it’s clearly riddled with fraud. I can judge the people who participate charitably, certainly, but the movement/theology behind it merits no charity, if it can be seen to serve deceptive purposes. After all, God does not practice deception, so if this phenomenon produces deception, my logic tells me that God is not the author of it.