A BIBLICAL CRITIQUE OF
THE MODERN TONGUES MOVEMENT
I. LIMITED TO A FEW
1 Corinthians 12:8-11, 29, 30.
Sovereignly bestowed by God – 1 Co 12:8.
Not to all Christians, but to select individual believers – 1 Co 12:8-11, 29, 30 (Greek)
II. NOT A PERMANENT GIFT
Other temporary gifts:
Miracles
Apostleship
Prophecy
Healing
Tongues
Interpretation of tongues.
I Cor. 13:8 says in Greek that tongues will come to an absolute cessation (PAUO) in and of themselves (middle voice) at one point (aorist tense). Verses 9-13 drop “tongues” and continue “prophecy” and “knowledge” as the two gifts that will continue until the closing of the canon (or the coming of Christ). A look at history substantiates this. There is no allusion or hint of the post-apostolic Fathers practicing the gift of tongues.
III. Purpose of Tongues – a sign to Israel of a change of economy in the way God deals with His people.
Tongues were an authentication of God’s message in the interval between the beginning of Christianity and the writing of the New Testament (Acts 2:22; Hebrews 2:3-4).
(Since the canon of Scripture was closed, it is sufficient to quote it to authenticate one’s message).
IV. History of doctrine:
-Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165) mentions seven gifts but does not include tongues.
-Irenaeus, A.D. 130-195, was influenced by Montanus (A.D. 126-180), who was a heretic & claimed to speak in tongues.
The only clear statement regarding tongues in the post-apostolic church is Eusebius’ description of the activity of Montanus.
-Chrysostom (A.D. 347-407): “…the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur, but now no longer take place.”
-There was no speaking in tongues among evangelicals until approximately 1875. 1901 was when the so-called modern tongues movement began.
-Is the lack of tongues in the church fathers an argument from silence?
Church fathers wrote to and from churches where the gift had been practiced.
Ignatius (disciple of the apostle John) said nothing about tongues.
Wide geographical coverage of the Apostolic Fathers made their silence significant.
They covered every major area of Christian doctrine.
The purpose of post-apostolic writings would have included tongues if they were extant in the post-New Testament period
V. NATURE OF TONGUES
-Tongues are nothing more than known languages of that day.
-“Tongue” means “language.”
-There is no evidence of incoherent, incomprehensible babbling in the Bible.
-Acts 2:4-11: Compare verse 6 dialektos with Rev. 5:9 and 7:9.
New Testament speakers spoke in dialects as well as foreign languages.
-Mark 16:17 – Kainos= new language to the speaker.
-Acts 10:46 – not different from Acts 2.
-Acts 19:6 – Ibid.
-Acts and First Corinthians’ usage of “tongues” is the same.
Paul and Luke were constant companions.
-1 Corinthians 12:10, 28 – genos ~ family, race – families of languages.
-1 Corinthians 13:1 – “Tongues of angels”
-“Though I speak” (third class condition) – Paul’s speaking in tongues was purely hypothetical.
-“Unknown” – 1 Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, 27 – “unknown” inserted by translators and is not in the original test of Scripture.
VI. PURPOSE
1 Corinthians 14:21, 22 – 21 quotes Isaiah 28:11.
It is a quotation that refers to the Assyrian invasion of Israel and speaking in Aramaic.
v. 22 is the only statement in the entire Word of God about the purpose of tongues.
“Therefore” – hoste – Preposition of ultimate purpose or result.
“For a sign” – idiom for purpose (compare 1 Cor. 1:22).
The purpose was to show Jews that there was a transition from the old economy to the new economy.
“but for them that believe not.”
The second “them” has an article before it (Greek), an article of previous reference (a reference to V. 21), so tongues are for unbelieving Jews in the transition period before the closing of the canon.
Tongues, therefore, are not for believers but to show unbelieving Jews that there was a change from the Old Testament to the New Testament economy.
In every occurrence of tongues in Acts, Jews are present – cf. Acts 2:4, 10:26, and 19:6.
No two accounts are the same in the reception of the Holy Spirit in Acts.
|
Acts |
|
||||||||||||
|
2 |
8 |
10 |
19 |
||||||||||
|
1. |
Sound of wind |
|
x |
||||||||||
|
2. |
Tongues of fire |
|
x |
||||||||||
|
3. |
Speaking in tongues |
x |
x |
x |
|||||||||
|
4. |
Laying on of hands |
x |
x |
||||||||||
|
5. |
Spirit received after salvation |
x | x | x | |||||||||
|
6. |
Spirit received at the moment of salvation |
|
x | ||||||||||
|
7. |
What doing when received: |
||||||||||||
|
a) |
Praying or listening to the Word |
x | |||||||||||
|
b) |
Praying |
x |
|||||||||||
|
c) |
Listening to a sermon |
|
x |
||||||||||
|
d) |
Paul finished explaining |
x |
|||||||||||
Since no two accounts are the same, we cannot draw any one pattern from the hook of Acts. It is necessary, therefore, to recognize the transitional character of the book of Acts. Many things that happened in Acts God never intended to be permanent patterns; e.g., we do not worship God in a Jewish Temple (2:46); are not struck dead instantaneously for lying (Acts 5:1-11); or converted through direct reve1ation (Acts 9:1-19). Also, Acts is not didactic; i.e., it is not trying to teach doctrine but simply giving history.
VII. REGULATIONS
Tongues must edify – 1 Cor. 14:23-26; cp, vv. 5, 12
Tongues must have an interpreter – 1 Cor. 14:27, 28
-only one per service.
Number and order:
– No more than three in one service;
– One at a time, 1 Co 14:27.
Women were not allowed to speak in the assembly (1 Co 14:34)
VII. EXPLANATIONS OF THE MODERN MOVEMENT OF TONGUES
Artificially simulated.
Psychological.
Some of it is Satanic.
VIII. EVALUATION OF THE MODERN TONGUES MOVEMENT
A. Positive
Stresses knowing God experientially.
Desire to go back to the biblical concept of spirituality.
Desire to fully obey the Word of God.
Emphasis on the person and work of the Holy Spirit
B. Negative
-Uses experience as the criterion for truth.
-Too much prominence is given to it over other biblical priorities.
-1 Corinthians 14 de-emphasizes and restrains its use
-tongues is last in the roster of gifts, 1 Corinthians 12:20-23
-Romans 12 and Ephesians rosters omit tongues
3. Unsound doctrine
–Confuses the baptism of the Spirit with the filling of the Spirit
BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT
-baptized once at the point of salvation
–all believers are universally baptized at salvation
-the baptism of the Spirit deals with position and standing before God
-the baptism of the Spirit is non-experiential, but status in God’s eyes
-the baptism of the Spirit is never commanded because it is something God does for the believer at the point of salvation
FILLING OF THE SPIRIT
–Continuous (Eph 5:18, present tense)
–Commanded (Eph 5:18, imperative mood)
-It is an experience or state of the believer
-Makes Spirit baptism subsequent to salvation, whereas the Bible teaches it occurred at the point of salvation.
-Confuses sanctification with a so-called second work of grace.
-Some tongue speakers border on the psychopathic.
-Some use tongues as a sublimation for studying doctrine.
-Spiritual pride.
-Substitutes sight for faith.
-Use tongues as a shortcut to maturity.
-Others use tongues as a spiritual toys.
-Some use tongues to divide believers from one another.
-Careless use of tongues invites demon influence.
-Too much focus on the Holy Spirit, whereas the Bible puts the primary focus on Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13, 14).
-Some use tongues as a test for salvation.
