What the Bible Says About SPEAKING IN TONGUES

The reference in verse 21 is to Isaiah 28:9-14 and both are speaking of known languages of other countries. Those verses are directed at the nation of Israel, and verse 22 says that they are a sign for that nation, specifically for unbelieving Jews.

Tongues are only spoken three times in the Bible. In Acts 2:4 the disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost and begin to speak in other tongues. WHY? To fulfill the above scripture there must be unbelieving Jews present. Were there?

Those Jews were there for the feast days (Pentecost is a Jewish feast), and they were unbelieving because they had never even heard of Jesus. Peter was getting ready to preach and the disciples were getting ready to witness. The tongues they spoke (the actual languages of the visitors) was a "sign" that their message was true!

Every tongue that was spoken that day was a known language. The tongues fulfilled two purposes. They were a sign, that the Jews required, to believe the message was true, and the means with which to tell them that truth.

The second case of speaking in tongues occurred in Acts 10. Peter went to an assembly of Gentiles who were ready to be saved and needed to hear the gospel. Gentiles had been scorned before this. Peter himself needed a special revelation from God so he would answer Cornelius' summons. (Acts 10:9-20) So Peter and "certain brethren" (v23) went to Cornelius, and he told them the good news.

Cornelius and his household were saved while listening to Peter. They received the Holy Spirit.

Now Peter was the only one who had received the revelation that Gentiles were no longer unclean, but other saved Jewish brethren were with him. They needed a "sign" that these Gentiles had really gotten saved, or they wouldn't believe it!

Tongues was the proof those skeptical Jews needed to believe that the Gentiles had really gotten saved. When Peter had problems explaining to the brethren back in Judea (Acts11:1-18) he pointed to that "sign" saying that the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost in the same manner (with the tongues) as they themselves had. (v15)

The third instance of speaking in tongues occurred 22 years later at Ephesus. In Acts 18:24-28 Apollos had been preaching the baptism of John. Aquila and Priscilla took him aside and "expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." He got saved and went his way preaching about Jesus.

The answer they gave tells any honest Bible student that these disciples of Apollos' couldn't possibly have been saved at that point.

These disciples of Apollos were Jews who had followed the light they had been given thus far. Before Paul arrived they had never heard of Jesus or his sacrifice, but they had believed Apollos preaching and received John's baptism. Just as Apollos was taught about Jesus and "believed through grace," so did Paul teach Apollos' disciples. He told them they must "believe...on Christ Jesus."

Paul laid hands on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Does this final example conform to the Bible rules? Yes. These men were Jews who were hearing the gospel for the first time. Remember, "Jews require a sign." Not only that, but Paul was there to speak in a synagogue to unbelievers (v8,9). He had a "ready made" sign to show those unbelievers, by the tongues that were spoken by those newly saved men. This was like what happened with Peter in Acts 2.

These three cases are the only times tongues are spoken in the Bible. Their abuse is discussed at Corinth but this gift is mentioned no where else. This seems incredible if tongues are so important.

The gift of tongues was a Jewish sign gift that was in effect while God was dealing with the Hebrew nation. It is listed twice in I Corinthians 12:8-11 & 28-30. In Paul's later lists in Ephesians 4:8-12 & Romans 12:4-8 tongues are not mentioned at all. Neither are they a "fruit of the Spirit" in Galatians 5:22,23. Paul tried to explain to the church at Corinth about the immediate future (at that time) of the gift of tongues.

"Prophecies" refers to the prophets who received direct and specific revelation from God to tell to the people. There are none but false prophets today who claim direct revelation from God. The Bible says:

All Christians can prophecy today from the word of God. They can tell an individual about his eternal destiny or the future of the world from what the Bible says. God talks to people today through his word, and where a "prophet" disagrees with the Bible, he is a liar.

"Tongues...Shall cease" refers to "tongues as a sign gift" during God's dealing with the nation of Israel. If tongues are a gift today, why do missionaries spend years studying to the learn the language of their fields? God has temporarily put the nation of Israel aside and the gift of Tongues given to them has ceased!

"Knowledge...shall vanish away" refers to the partial knowledge that we have of God. In many places the Bible speaks of this knowledge, but it still can give us only very limited enlightenment.

At this point Christians only know what the Bible says about God and can only prophecy what the Bible says about the future. But in the future that partial knowledge shall be complete.

When Paul said "but then face to face" he was referring to the Lord's return."Glass" is a reference to the word of God as in James 1:23. We see the Lord in the Bible but not clearly. When we see him at his coming it will be "face to face" (see II John 12) and with completed knowledge.

"That which" is the same "that which" of I John 1:1 : Jesus Christ. John sums it up.

Now today Biblical tongues have ceased, but they had not yet done so when Paul wrote to the Corinthians. Note some things about the church at Corinth.

These are only SOME of the problems Paul wrote about in this church. This is NOT a spiritual church! I Corinthians 14 is another chapter written to CORRECT a carnal people! This church is trying to ACT spiritual (when it wasn't) by imitating what happened on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was given.

In the first six verses of I Corinthians 14 Paul said that prophecy is more edifying than tongues. He said that you were speaking into the air if your words were not understood, and that you sounded like a barbarian. In verse 12 you are to seek to edify the church (NOT seek tongues). Prophesying edifies the church according to verse 4. Paul would have rather spoken five words that could be understood than ten thousand that were not.

If a church wants visitors to worship God TONGUES IS NOT THE WAY!!! Paul told the Corinthians the rules. In verses 27 & 28 he said that only three people may speak in tongues at any service and then only one at a time and with an interpreter! He told them there should be no emotional display and confusion in verses 32 & 33. No women were to speak in tongues. That's verse 34, and it sure knocks out a lot of the modern day movement! Lastly, if you wanted to be ignorant, go ahead!

Paul knew that he was writing to a carnal church full of spiritual babies. The ENTIRE epistle was written to rebuke them about their doctrine and practices! Why would any church want to be like this one?

Some Christians today say that tongues are for private or personal devotions and that it is a "heavenly" language that nobody understands. The Bible says:

If tongues are so easily proven to be unscriptural why are so many Christians concerned with the subject? Since God has been ruled out there are three possible sources of the modern day tongues movement: Satan, psychological hype, and charlatans. All three make the movement what it is.

Tongues flourish where the Bible is not understood, or where people seek experiences and feelings rather than Bible truth.

The Devil IMITATES the real thing to deceive people. His imitations are often so close that people can only tell the difference if they study God's word.

Here you have counterfeit ministers with counterfeit signs! The Bible has a name for those who say they have the JEWISH APOSTOLIC gifts.

If you have been deceived by a non-Christian experience of speaking in tongues don't be discouraged. So have many other Christians. You have to determine now whether you will follow your own feelings, or whether you will yield to God's word. The choice is yours.

The King James Bible is the final authority for all doctrine,
faith, and practice. Any deviation from the text is purely inadvertent.

A PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE?

March 6, 2006 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist
Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron,
MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for
instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing
or changing addresses, see the information
paragraph at the end of the article) -

Pentecostals and Charismatics often teach that
there are two types of tongues described in the
New Testament: the "public language tongues" of
Pentecost and the "private prayer" tongues of 1
Corinthians 14:4 -- "He that speaketh in an
unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that
prophesieth edifieth the church." Some call this
distinction "ministry tongues" and "devotional
tongues."

Early Pentecostal leaders understood that
biblical tongues were real earthly languages.
They even thought they would be able to go to
foreign mission fields and witness through
miraculous tongues without having to learn the
languages. Those who attempted this, though,
returned bitterly disappointed!

"Alfred G. Garr and his wife went to the Far East
with the conviction that they could preach the
gospel in 'the Indian and Chinese languages.'
Lucy Farrow went to Africa and returned after
seven months during which she was alleged to have
preached to the natives in their own 'Kru
language.' The German pastor and analyst Oskar
Pfister reported the case of a Pentecostal...
'Simon,' who had planned to go to China using
tongues for preaching. Numerous other Pentecostal
missionaries went abroad believing they had the
miraculous ability to speak in the languages of
those to whom they were sent. These Pentecostal
claims were well known at the time. S.C. Todd of
the Bible Missionary Society investigated
eighteen Pentecostals who went to Japan, China,
and India 'expecting to preach to the natives in
those countries in their own tongue,' and found
that by their own admission 'in no single
instance have [they] been able to do so.' As
these and other missionaries returned in
disappointment and failure, Pentecostals were
compelled to rethink their original view of
speaking in tongues" (Robert Mapes Anderson,
Vision of the Disinherited: The Making of
American Pentecostalism).

The conclusion was soon reached that their
"tongues" were not earthly languages but a
"heavenly" or special prayer language; and those
are the terms we have heard frequently at large
Charismatic conferences, such as those in New
Orleans in 1987, Indianapolis in 1990, and St.
Louis in 2000. The tongues that I heard in these
conferences were not languages of any sort, but
merely repetitious mumblings that anyone could
imitate. Larry Lea supposedly spoke in tongues in
Indianapolis in 1990, and this is a key example
of what is being passed off for tongues in the
Charismatic movement. It went something like
this: "Bubblyida bubblyida hallelujah bubblyida
hallabubbly shallabubblyida kolabubblyida
glooooory hallelujah bubblyida." I wrote that
down as he was saying it and later checked it
against the tape. Nancy Kellar, a Roman Catholic
nun who was on the executive committee of the St.
Louis meeting in 2000, spoke in "tongues" on
Thursday evening of the conference. Her tongues
went like this: "Shananaa leea, shananaa higha,
shananaa nanaa, shananaa leeaS" repeated over and
over and over.

If you think I'm making fun of these people, you
are wrong. This is taken directly from the
audiotapes of the messages. If these are
languages, they certainly have a simple
vocabulary! My children had a more complex
language than that when they were still toddlers.

Michael Harper says: "In the short history of the
Charismatic Renewal speaking in tongues has
become rare in public, but continues to be a
vital expression of prayer in private (These
Wonderful Gifts, 1989, p. 97). He says this type
of "tongues" is "a prayer language: a way of
communicating more effectively with God" (p. 92).
He claims that this experience "edifies" apart
from the understanding: "Modern Western man finds
it hard to believe that speaking unknown words to
God can possibly be edifying. ... All one can say
is 'try it and see'. I can still remember today
the moments when I first used this gift, and the
immediate awareness I had that I was being
edified. This is one of the most important
reasons why the gift needs to be used regularly
in private prayer" (These Wonderful Gifts, p.
93). Harper says he is mystically aware of being
edified even though he does not know what he is
saying. He also says this "gift needs to be used
regularly" and is therefore something important
for the Christian life.

To prove his point he simply invites the
skeptical observer to "try it and see," reminding
us that experience is the Charismatic's greatest
authority. (The "come and see" approach creates a
new problem, though, for the Bible never says to
"try tongues" or to seek after tongues and never
describes how one could learn how to speak in
tongues. In the Bible, speaking in tongues is
always a supernatural activity that is
sovereignly given by God.)

Even some that do not claim to be Pentecostals or
Charismatics have this experience. Jerry Rankin,
head of the International Mission Board (Southern
Baptist), says he speaks in a "private prayer
language" and contrasts this with the practice of
"glossolalia."

"I do have a private prayer language, have for
more than 30 years. I don't consider myself to
have a gift of tongues. I've never been led to
practice glossolalia, you know, publicly, and I
think the spiritual gifts clearly in the didactic
passage of the Scriptures are talking about the
public uses, edification and gifts in the church.
... I've never viewed personally my intimacy with
the Lord and the way His Spirit guides me in my
prayer time as being the same as glossolalia and
subjected to that criteria. ... I just want God
to have freedom to do everything that He wants to
do in my life and I'm going to be obedient to
that" ("IMB president speaks plainly with state
editors about private prayer language," Baptist
Press, Feb. 17, 2006).

It is a wonderful thing to desire to do God's
will wherever that leads, but He will never lead
contrary to His own Word in the Scriptures. For
the following reasons we are convinced that the
Bible does not support the doctrine of a "private
prayer language."

FIRST, PAUL SAID THE TONGUES SPEAKER EDIFIES
HIMSELF (1 Cor. 14:4). That would not be possible
unless the words could be understood, because
throughout the fourteenth chapter of 1
Corinthians Paul says that understanding is
necessary for edification. In verse 3 he says
that prophesying edifies because it comforts and
exhorts men, obviously referring to things that
are understood to the hearer. In verse 4 he says
that tongues speaking does not edify unless it is
interpreted. In verses 16-17 he says that if
someone does not understand something he is not
edified. Words could not be plainer. If there is
no edification of the church without
understanding, how is it that the individual
believer could be edified without understanding?
This is confusion. The word "edify" means to
build up in the faith. Webster's 1828 dictionary
defined it as "to instruct and improve the mind
in knowledge generally, and particularly in moral
and religious knowledge, in faith and holiness."
The words "edify," "edification," "edified," and
"edifying" are used in 18 verses in the New
Testament and always refer to building up in the
faith by means of instruction and godly living.
For example, in Ephesians 4 the body of Christ is
edified through the ministry of God-given
preachers (Eph. 4:11-12).

SECOND, IF THE TONGUES OF 1 CORINTHIANS 14 IS
DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF ACTS 2, THE BIBLE NEVER
EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE. We leave "tongues" in
the book of Acts (the last mention is in Acts
19:6) and we do not see them again until 1
Corinthians 12-14. If the "tongues" in this
epistle is a different type of thing than the
"tongues" in Acts, why doesn't the Bible say so?

THIRD, PAUL SAYS THAT TONGUES ARE AN EARTHLY
LANGUAGE (1 Cor. 14:20-22). If tongues were some
sort of "private prayer language," why would Paul
give this prophetic explanation of it and state
dogmatically that it is an earthly language? He
does not say that some types of tongues are
languages and others are not.

FOURTH, IN 1 COR. 14:28 PAUL SAYS THE TONGUES
SPEAKER SPEAKS BOTH TO HIMSELF AND TO GOD. "But
if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence
in the church; and let him speak to himself, and
to God." This means that he can understand what
he is speaking. Otherwise, how could he speak to
himself? Does anyone speak to himself in "unknown
gibberish"?

FIFTH, IF THERE WERE A "PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE"
THAT EDIFIED THE CHRISTIAN'S LIFE IT WOULD BE
VERY IMPORTANT AND THE BIBLE WOULD EXPLAIN IT
CLEARLY AND CIRCUMSCRIBE ITS USAGE AS IT DOES THE
USE OF TONGUES IN THE CHURCH. Further, a "private
prayer language" that helped the Christian to be
stronger in his walk with Christ would doubtless
be mentioned in other places in the New Testament
in the context of sanctification and Christian
living. In fact, though, it is never mentioned in
such a context. The apostles and prophets
addressed many situations in the New Testament
epistles and gave all things necessary for holy
Christian living, but they never taught that the
believer needs to speak in a "private prayer
language" in order to have spiritual victory.

SIXTH, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT TONGUES-SPEAKING
COULD BE A NECESSARY PART OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE,
BECAUSE PAUL PLAINLY STATES THAT NOT ALL SPEAK IN
TONGUES (1 Cor. 14:29-20). Some will ask, "Why,
then, does Paul say, 'I would that ye all spake
with tongues'" (1 Cor. 14:5)? We answer that Paul
was not saying that they all did speak with
tongues or that they all could speak with
tongues; he was merely expressing a desire that
the exercise of spiritual gifts be done and that
it be done right. Paul is looking upon tongues
when it is interpreted as another form of
prophesying and both were effective in edifying
the church, and his burden was to see the church
edified in every way. He said, "I would that ye
all spake with tongues, but rather that ye
prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth
than he that speaketh with tongues, except he
interpret, that the church may receive edifying."
Note that the apostle exalted prophesying above
tongues, but the Charismatic movement focuses on
tongues more than prophesying.

SEVENTH, ALL OF THE NEW TESTAMENT'S INSTRUCTION
ABOUT PRAYER TAKE FOR GRANTED THAT PRAYER IS A
CONSCIOUS, WILLFUL, UNDERSTANDABLE ACT ON THE
PART OF THE BELIEVER AND THAT HE IS SPEAKING TO
GOD IN UNDERSTANDABLE TERMS. We see this in
Jesus' instructions about prayer. "After this
manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in
heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us
our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us
not into temptation, but deliver us from evil:
For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the
glory, for ever. Amen" (Matt. 6:5-13). We also
see this in Paul's instructions about prayer
(i.e., Rom. 15:30-32; Eph. 6:18-20; Col. 4:2-3;
Heb. 13:18-19). There is not one example of a
prayer recorded in Scripture that is anything
other than an individual speaking to God in
understandable terms. In fact, Christ forbade the
repetitious type of "prayers" that are commonly
heard among those that practice a "private prayer
language." "But when ye pray, use not vain
repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think
that they shall be heard for their much speaking"
(Mat. 6:7). Yet I have oftentimes heard "prayer
tongues" that sound like this: "Shalalama,
balalama, shalalama, balalama, bubalama,
shalalama, bugalala, shalalama...." Whatever that
is, it is not New Testament "tongues" and it is
not New Testament prayer.

EIGHTH, EVEN IF WE WERE TO AGREE THAT 1 COR. 14
REFERS TO A "PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE," IT WOULD
NOT BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LEARNED OR
IMITATED. Whatever is described in 1 Corinthians
14 is a divine miracle, but this is contrary to
the Pentecostal-Charismatic practice whereby
people are taught to speak in a "prayer
language." This brings us to our final point.

NINTH, THE PRACTICE OF LEARNING HOW TO SPEAK IN
TONGUES THAT IS POPULAR AMONG PENTECOSTALS AND
CHARISMATICS IS UNSCRIPTURAL AND DANGEROUS. If we
were to agree that there is such a thing as a
"private prayer language" and that it would help
us live a better Christian life and if we were to
accept the Charismatic's challenge to "try it and
see," the next question is, "How do I begin to
speak in this 'prayer language'?" A chapter in
the book These Wonderful Gifts (by Michael
Harper) is entitled "Letting Go and Letting God,"
in which the believer is instructed to stop
analyzing experiences so carefully and strictly,
to stop "setting up alarm systems" and "squatting
nervously behind protective walls." He says the
believer should step out from behind his "walls
and infallible systems" and just open up to God.
That is a necessary but unscriptural and
exceedingly dangerous step toward receiving the
Charismatic experiences. Having stopped analyzing
everything with Scripture, the standard method of
experiencing the "gift of tongues" or a "private
prayer language" is to open one's mouth and to
start speaking words but not words that one
understands and allegedly "God will take
control." Dennis Bennett says: "Open your mouth
and show that you believe the Lord has baptized
you in the Spirit by beginning to speak. Don't
speak English, or any other language you know,
for God can't guide you to speak in tongues if
you are speaking in a language known to you. ...
Just like a child learning to talk for the first
time, open your mouth and speak out the first
syllables and expressions that come to your lips.
... You may begin to speak, but only get out a
few halting sounds. That's wonderful! You've
broken the 'sound barrier'! Keep in with those
sounds. Offer them to God. Tell Jesus you love
Him in those 'joyful noises'! In a very real
sense, any sound you make, offering your tongue
to God in simple faith, may be the beginning of
speaking in tongues" (The Holy Spirit and You,
pp. 76, 77, 79).

This is so grossly unscriptural and nonsensical
it would not seem necessary to refute it. There
is absolutely nothing like this in the New
Testament. To ignore the Bible and to seek
something that the Bible never says seek in ways
the Bible does not support and to open oneself
uncritically to religious experiences like this
puts oneself in danger of receiving "another
spirit" (2 Cor. 11:4).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.