Gifts of the Spirit: Tongues

The word used for tongue can mean the tongue in your mouth, or it can refer to languages. If we ignore the passages in Acts and 1 Corinthians that talk about speaking in tongues, we see that every other time the Bible uses this word, it is talking about someone talking in a foreign language. There are a couple references to this in the OT (Isa 28:11-12; 33:19), but most of the references happen in the book of Revelation (5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15)

So, if we didn’t have Acts and 1 Cor, we would assume that whenever we see the word tongue, it is either referring to our literal tongue, or it is referring to a literal language. The question is, does the book of Acts or the book of 1 Corinthians give us reason to think that tongues can sometimes mean an ecstatic utterance instead of a foreign language?

Acts 2:1-13

• If tongues means foreign languages, then this passage is very straightforward. The Spirit gave them the ability to speak in foreign languages, and the people from other countries understood them in their own language.

• The only thing that gives us pause in this passage is that phrase at the end - the people who mocked them thought they were drunk. Why is that? Is that because they were speaking ecstatic utterances, or is that because they were all talking in different languages that some people couldn’t understand? Frankly, you're not going to figure that out from this passage. But Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12-14 talk about tongues in the same way, so we also need to look there.

1 Corinthians 12-14

• In these chapters, Paul is answering a question about spiritual gifts, and he focuses in on two of the gifts: prophecy and tongues. (We talked about prophecy in the last post)

• A couple of things to notice:

  • • 12:30 - not everyone speaks with tongues. Not everyone has the same gifts, but that doesn’t mean that one member of the church is more important than other people. Everyone is a part of the body, everyone has different roles, but everyone is needed for the body to function and grow. That’s the point of the Spiritual gifts 12:7 - they are “for the common good.”

    • Chapter 13. We won’t read it all, but just think about the context of this chapter. It’s in the middle of a discussion about spiritual gifts. Why? Because Paul wants them to know that their spiritual gifts mean nothing if they are not used in love for one another. If you’re not loving each other (love is patient, love is kind…) then it doesn’t matter what kind of gifts you have, they’re worthless.

    • 14:27-28 - Paul is clear, tongues should only be used if there is an interpreter. The reason for this is really Paul’s argument throughout this whole passage: If someone can’t understand it, it doesn’t help them. And so Paul tells them to prophesy, because that is what people can understand, and it’s only through people understanding the word of God that they can have faith and be saved. So Paul basically outlaws the use of tongues in the church gathering unless there is an interpreter, because it’s not helping the people in the church, and it’s not helping the unbelievers that might show up to your church.

1 Cor 13:1

• You could say that all of chapters 12-14 also make sense if tongues means "foreign language." But what about the phrase in this verse, "the tongues of angels." Is Paul talking about ecstatic utterance, or about something else?

• The point of what Paul is saying is that if his language was so magnificent that it was like an angel from heaven was talking, then that still wouldn’t matter if there wasn’t love. This is about the quality of the speech, not the type of speech. Because Paul expects the people to understand what he’s saying. The reason his speech would be like a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal is not because the people couldn’t understand what he’s saying and that’s what tongues sounds like without an interpreter. The reason it sounds like a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal is because there is no love involved.

  • • And that’s a truth for us to remember. We can say all the right things, and say them well. But if we don’t speak the truth in love, then that message is just going to be noise, it’s just going to be word upon word, line upon line.

• And so I would argue that this verse which may appear to be talking about ecstatic utterances is actually talking about something else - it’s talking about needing love in our words. And if that’s what this verse means, there’s really nothing else in these chapters that makes us think that tongues is anything besides a real language that people speak.

So, because of these understandings of Acts 2 and 1 Cor 12-14, as well as the fact that everywhere else in the Bible, the word tongues is referring to actual languages, I think it the best understanding of the Bible is to understand that tongues is not talking about ecstatic utterances, but foreign languages.

Does the gift of tongues continue today?

To start to answer this question, I think it's important to think about the full scope of Scripture. Where do you see great signs and wonders being done by people in the Bible? Moses, Elijah and Elisha, Jesus and the apostles. That’s really about it apart from one or two things here and there.

That in itself should make us tend to think that miraculous gifts are not the norm, but that they show up at certain times for certain reasons. Moses gave the law, Elijah and Elisha were more or less the start of the official prophetic ministry, Jesus brought in the NC and the disciples wrote the NT. All of those things have to do with new eras of revelation, and so God sends signs and wonders to testify that this is legitimate and from Him, even though it is new at the time (Acts 2:22; Acts 14:3; 2 Cor 12:12; Heb 2:3-4).

If these miraculous sign gifts are tied to the ministry of the Apostles to verify their witness as Scripture (and the above verses do make that connection), then basically settles the matter depending on where you fall on the continuation of revelation. And so if we believe that the Bible is complete, and there’s no new revelation, then there’s no reason to think that those miraculous gifts and signs would continue because they’ve already fulfilled their main purpose, the New Testament has been finished.

• This is the reason why we don’t have the same experiences as the people in the book of Acts. We don’t experience all the signs and wonders, not because we don’t have as much faith, but because God gave those miraculous gifts at a certain time for a certain purpose. But now He calls us to proclaim the word, not through signs and miracles, but through preaching and teaching the Bible so that people would have faith and be saved (Rom 10:17).

Sinclair Ferguson (1) suggested that tongues and prophecy are treated as equivalent avenues of revelation in the Bible, and that is an intriguing way to think about the cessation argument. You look at the gift of tongues in Acts 2, and Peter says this is evidence of the Spirit being poured out, and then he quotes the book of Joel. But if you read carefully, that passage in Joel doesn’t actually talk about tongues, it talks about prophecy and dreams and visions. So the inference is that Peter is viewing tongues as equivalent with prophecy since they are both a work of the Spirit by which people are hearing the word of God in their own language.
When you read 1 Cor 12-14, you also get the impression that tongues and prophecy are on the same level. They’re listed together in 1 Cor 13:8, In 1 Cor 14 you’re not supposed to speak in tongues in the congregation unless there’s an interpreter, but if they are interpreted, then it carries the same weight as prophecy, which also makes them carry the weight of revelation.

There aren't a lot of verses to help us think about this idea, but if tongues are a form of revelation like prophecy is, then that would also be another reason why they would not continue today, because revelation has stopped - nothing new is getting added to the Bible.

(1) Sinclair Ferguson, "The Holy Spirit," 230.