Jesus said: these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name . . . they shall speak with new tongues. (Mark 16:17) The gift of tongues is the ability to speak or understand another language. It is of use when preaching the gospel to people of other nationalities. It was of most use, in the history of the early church, when gospel missions took apostles and evangelists to regions of other languages, which had never heard the gospel.
Paul went on gospel missions and probably met people who could not speak his language. Therefore he says: I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all. (1 Corinthians 14:18) Yet Paul did not try to prove his spirituality by speaking these foreign languages in the church. To the contrary he says: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (1 Corinthians 14:19)
Today, probably for almost every language, there are preachers who are fluent. Also with modern scholarship it is very much easier to learn a language. Therefore the gift of tongues is not needed very often today. Nevertheless occasionally it is. I heard of a modern apostle in India named Bakht Singh who, on a gospel mission, reached a region whose language he did not understand. God then gave him the ability to preach in that language.
However there is no such thing as speaking in tongues by the Holy Spirit without the speaker knowing what he is saying. The speaking in tongues that occurs in most so-called Pentecostal churches is simply meaningless noises, and is based upon a misinterpretation of 1 Corinthians 14. I will justify this statement later.
People of other religions, who do not claim to be Christian, have been heard to ‘speak in tongues’ the so-called Pentecostal way. So this false counterfeit way of ‘tongues’, does not prove salvation, in the way that the true gift did on the day of Pentecost and soon after. The same man, Bakht Singh, who preached in another language, forbad so-called Pentecostals from muttering words with no meaning in the churches he established, of which there were five hundred.
Being in the Spirit does not mean being without our natural understanding of the language. When the apostle John was in the Spirit he understood what God was saying. He said: I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia. (Revelation 1:10)
So when Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:2: For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him, howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries, there is no reason to assume that the speaker of tongues is without his understanding because he is ‘in the spirit’. When it says, ‘no man understands him,’ it means no one else, and does not mean the speaker cannot understand himself. Where it says he speaks to God, there is no reason to assume that he speaks to God any more effectively than in his native tongue.
Where it says, ‘he speaks mysteries’, this also does not mean he doesn't understand, for Jesus said to His disciples: Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables. (Mark 4:11) Thus Jesus gives us by the Spirit the understanding to know the things of God. So the concept of not understanding spiritual things is for those outside the kingdom of God. As the purpose of the Holy Spirit is to help us to understand God, the idea that the Holy Spirit works within us without our understanding is contrary to the purpose for the gift of the Holy Spirit. This purpose is stated in 1 Corinthians 2:11,12: what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Tongue speakers often claim they are supposed to speak in tongues to God in prayer. But Jesus taught us how to speak to God and this is in a manner similar to the Lord's Prayer, using simple, intelligible words, not muttering. It is dangerous to neglect this foundational teaching of Christ in pursuit of ‘higher spirituality’.
Two men in the Old Testament neglected the foundational teachings of Moses in their worship of God, and their fate is recorded in Leviticus 10:1-3: And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord. Then Moses said unto Aaron, This is that the Lord spake, saying, I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified. This was a temporal judgement only. They did not go to hell. But it does teach us to fear our God, who is a consuming fire. Nadab and Abihu were not wicked rebels. They just did not understand the importance of the commandment of God, and the holiness of his word.
To put the true gift of tongues in perspective, we should understand that tongues is one of the least gifts, being last on the list of 1 Corinthians 12:28. Not all speak with tongues according to 1 Corinthians 12:30: do all speak with tongues?
Tongues is just another word for languages, both in English and in Greek. So-called Pentecostals base much of their doctrine on a misinterpretation of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, so I will discusss this church now.
We should note that the church at Corinth was not the model church that we should all copy, as Paul writes to them: And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. (1 Corinthians 3:1)
Paul's letter to them was very much a reproof for their stupidity. We can learn what not to do better than what to do. Unfortunately the Pentecostals have assumed that the Corinthians were close to the truth, so if their ways were adjusted slightly according to Paul's reproof it would be correct. This is a bit like hearing a father reprove his children for lying in the middle of the road when there is busy traffic and deciding that you are supposed to be in the middle of the road whenever the traffic is not busy.
On the day of Pentecost, the apostles preached in languages they had not previously known. These were the tongues given by God, comprehensible languages, which both the speaker and hearer could understand: And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying to one another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Partheans, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia . . . we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. (Acts 2:7-11) Those who spake is in the plural; so presumably one Galilean spoke Parthean, another Mesopotamian, another Cappadocean etc. The Jews who had come from these distant lands once a year to keep the feast of Pentecost, must have forgotten their native tongue. Therefore the gift of tongues was necessary to enable them to hear the gospel.
Some wrongly deduce from 1 Corinthians 13:1 that there are two gifts: tongues of men; and tongues of angels. Paul says: Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass. But Paul does not say he spoke with tongues of angels any more than he says he gave his body to be burned when later he says: though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. So when Paul says: Though I speak with the tongues of . . . angels, it is like saying, ‘Even if I could fly like superman I would be nothing if I did not have charity (or love)’. Anyway I am sure that when angels talk they understand what they are saying, otherwise what is the point of talking.
What Pentecostals speak is not the tongues of angels; it is a load of meaningless rubbish. Were it really the language of heaven revealing secrets not known to man then it would be unlawful to speak it. Paul says: I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago . . . How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (2 Corinthians 12:2-4) But we have not been caught up to heaven and have not heard the words of heaven other than what is written in the bible, which is God's complete revelation to man, until the Lord is about to return, when God will send Elijah. But if we try to be too spiritual then we are likely to be given a counterfeit experience by the devil, of whom Paul writes: Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:14)
The crux of Paul's message is that tongues are nothing special, just a means of facilitating communication where natural language barriers exist. But Paul has to say a lot to convince them of this. First Paul tells them that the mere fact of speaking in another language does not mean that the content of the message is of any value: Now brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? (1 Corinthians 14:6)
Now to those who speak in so-called tongues without knowing what they say, how can you obey this word? How can you take heed to the words of Paul and ensure that your so-called ‘tongues’ contain revelation, knowledge, prophesying or teaching? Your inability to obey 1 Corinthians 14:6 with the modern Pentecostal so-called tongues is evidence that it is not the type of tongues being referred to by Paul here, but is a false type of tongues. That tongues, one of the least gifts, merely open a channel of communication, and do not guarantee the spirituality of the message spoken is at variance with what modern Pentecostals believe about their tongues. The logic of this argument applies equally as well to private prayer as the public speaking.
Paul continues in 1 Corinthians 14:7-13 to tell them of the futility of speaking in languages that the hearer cannot understand: even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me. Note that Paul is talking about ‘voices in the world’, not tongues of angels. Those speaking in an unknown tongue are not regarded as angels, but as ‘barbarians’ or (foreigners). Evidently the Corinthians had been using their Holy Spirit inspired gift of tongues for a purpose not intended by God. The purpose of the gift was to facilitate communication to those who could not speak the same language. But the Corinthians were using the gift in a way that hindered communication. For example God may have given a Corinthian the ability to speak Swahili, when he met an African a year previously, but that Corinthian was now speaking Swahili to a congregation in Corinth, none of whom could understand it. The folly of this should have been apparent to all.
One might wonder why God continued to give the gift of tongues in situations where it was not necessary. It may be that the person, by reason of use, had eventually learned the language so that he could then speak the language naturally without divine help.
Paul applies the same logic that he has been using for preaching, to prayer when he says: If I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. (1 Corinthians 14:14) This Scripture is very much misunderstood, as it does not mean that the speaker of another tongue does not, himself, understand what he is saying. Paul’s meaning is that the understanding of the speaker of another tongue, does not produce any useful fruit in the minds of the hearers. That this is the correct interpretation is made clear later when Paul says: Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
So therefore, when Paul says: I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also (1 Corinthians 14:15,) he means that he will pray with a fruitful understanding or a useful understanding; that is, one that is useful to others or in other words intelligible to others. He is not referring to whether the speaker himself can understand his own words, but even if he was this verse would be of little consolation to Pentecostals as it speaks against praying without understanding.
Also consistent with Paul's theme of the unprofitability of unnecessary tongues are his words in 1 Corinthians 14:4: He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself, but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. This does not mean that the individual who speaks in tongues (eg. Swahili) is more edified than if he spoke his normal tongue (e.g. English). It is merely saying that the rest of the congregation is not edified because they do not understand. (Always when speaking spiritual words we are edified, for example singing a song of praise to God in our hearts: be filled with the Spirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 5:18-20) So whether our mouth is open or closed we may be filled with the Spirit by gratitude and spiritual song.)
Thus we can see how Paul criticises the incorrect use of tongues although he does not completely forbid their use. In 1 Corinthians 14:5 he says: greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. This covers the case for example of speaking Swaheli in the midst of an English speaking congregation. This is futile unless there is another African in the congregation. But even in this case it is a greater ministry to edify the whole church than just the few who speak Swaheli. Therefore if the preacher also knows the language of the majority, he should also translate into this language (interpret).
Paul also gives instructions to a Christian whose native tongue differs from that of the congregation. To him Paul says: Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. (1 Corinthians 14:13) So the Swahili speaker in an English congregation, is to pray that he can interpret or understand English.
Until such time as the tongue speakers can understand the language of the congregation, their input to the church meeting is to be limited: If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two or at the most by three, and that by course, and let one interpret. (1 Corinthians 14:27) Thus in England one person can speak Swaheli, another Portuguese and another Dutch provided all speeches are translated into English. If there is no one to translate, the foreigner is to keep silent during an English church meeting, although he should pray to God quietly: if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. (1 Corinthians 14:28)
So I have shown that there is no scriptural reason to believe that scriptural tongues are anything other than foreign languages, and many reasons to believe that they are just that. What then of the feeling of peace that Pentecostals claim to feel. Various forms of meditation such as transcendental meditation also give a feeling of peace, although they are mental rather than spiritual. Speaking in tongues has also resulted in madness, indicating it is not of God. I believe that abdicating from the normal use of one's God given mental powers nullifies the control God exerts over us by our mind and conscience, and makes us vulnerable to evil deception. Accordingly it transgresses the first commandment: Thou shall have no other gods before me.
Tongues, in addition to facilitating communication, have had a second purpose: to act as a miraculous sign of the truth of the gospel. The sign was primarily intended for unbelievers, that the gospel is true, but it also convinced Jewish believers that the truth of the gospel extended to all, both Jews and Gentiles.
The amazement of the unbelievers on the Day of Pentecost is seen in Acts 2:6,12: the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language . . . And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Peter answered them saying that God: will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath . . . before that great and notable day of the Lord come. (Acts 2:19,20) To those who believed that tongues were a sign of the coming day of the Lord, Peter continued his speech by promising: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. (We should note that it was not only that the believers were speaking in new tongues that convinced the hearers; it was also the content of the message spoken in those tongues. Peter, referring to the tongue speakers, said: they shall prophesy. (Acts 2:18) This is what their speeches were.)
And believers were amazed at the gift of tongues, when it was given to the Gentiles, because it indicated that the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost: While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we. (Acts 10:44-47) In order to have convinced the Jews that the Gentiles had received the same Holy Spirit it would have been necessary for the Gentiles to have spoken in the same type of tongues as the Jews; that is, in intelligible languages, such as were spoken on the Day of Pentecost.
If this sign had not been given, the Jews may not have accepted that the Gentiles could receive the Holy Spirit. The barrier in the minds of the Jewish believers, which was overcome by the gift of tongues, is evident from Acts 11:2-4,15,17,18: And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them. But Peter rehearsed the matter . . . saying . . . And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning . . . Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
Although in the early church it was necessary to convince the believing Jews that the gospel was for all, this reason no longer applies because today we have the Scriptures to convince us of this. However unbelievers still need convincing of the truth of the gospel today. That this reason rather than the former is the only reason for tongues as a sign today, is explained by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14:20-22: Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit, in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that, will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.
It should be noted that whilst an unbeliever may be amazed that a foreigner can speak his language without learning it, no one is going to be convinced by hearing unintelligible mutterings.
The reason Paul explains to them that tongues are a sign for unbelievers, not believers, is to show them that they have no place in a normal church service. Believers have the Holy Spirit and the bible and this should be sufficient. Thus Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:23: if therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?