Speaking in Tongues - Whats the Point? (Part Two)

Over the past sixty years it has become quite common to find Christians in almost all denominations that speak or have spoken in tongues.  It is often referred to as a charismatic gift.  The first record of anyone speaking in togues (it simply means 'languages'), is on the Day of Pentecost.  This occured first yays after the death of Jesus Christ on a cross.  He rose on the third day from the crucifixion, ascended into heaven on the fourtieth day, and poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit on the believers in  Jerusalem (possibly 120 people) on the fiftieth day.  The relevance of his death for our salvation through the forgiveness of sins, and the timings afterwards are dealt with elsewhere.

In Part One of this short series I showed how the Day of Pentecost was only the first of several mentioned in Acts, and how it was not uncommon for speaking in tongues to be mentioned when these events took place.  At the start of the 20th Century, a spititual awakening took place that is usually referred to as the Pentecostal revival.  In this movement, ordinary Christians in the UK and various other parts of the world also experienced a profound baptism in the Holy Spirit, often associated with speaking in tongues. By the 1960s what had been separate from other Christian traditions became common with the development of the charismatic movement within almost all denominations.

My own engagement with traditonal Pentecostalism began in 1963, and my eersonal experience of as profound baptism of the Holy Spirit took place in the end of autumn 1964 (See A Baptism of Love).  At the time of that experience I did not speak in other tongues.  But a few weeks afterwards, while having my regular time of prayer I began praying in a language I had never learned.  But what is the point?

Tongues is not for sharing the gospel with foreigners.

This is one of the most common misunderstandings.  It arises from a combination of the reference to people from various parts of the Mediterranean world who were in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost, and general lack of understanding.  There is nothing in the account in Acts two to suggest that the gospel was preached in these various languages.  What people heard them speaking was "ho megaleios ho theos" which means the spleandour of God.  In other words, they were praising God, and not preaching the gospel.

The crowd was drawn by the noise and the behaviour of the disciples that gave the impression they were drunk.  Only then does Peter start to preach, and what he start doing is explaining what the phenomina was.  It is during that message that people came under conviction and asked what they should do.  Peter would have probably preached in Aramaic as it was the common language of the time and place.  He could also have used Greek which was an official common language but Jesus usually used Aramaic and I am confident that all the visiors would have understood Peter's message or why would they respond?

Further, what is the point of speaking in tongues to the Ephesian believers or those in Cornelius' household?

If tongues is not for talking to unbelievers, who is being spoken to?

Writing to the Christians in Corinth, Paul states, " For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit"  (1Corinthians 14:2).

Later in the same chapter in verses 13 to 17 he writes about praying, praising or giving thanks in tongues.  All of which makes clear that it is a communication from a bliever to God.  They do not necessarily understand what they are saying and do not need to.  It is a spiritual communication and not an intellectual one.

While I might not uderstand what I am saying if I pray in a tongue, I edify or build up myself.  That implies a spiritual strengthening.  Many years ago I was invited to a meeting with a number of Strict Baptist Christians who had become curious about what was happening in another church.  After a period of difficult conversations, one senior deacon asked if his brethren had noted that, when he was taking a service, in the hymn immediately before the sermon, he would sit bowed in prayer.  They said they had noticed.  He then told them that this when he prayed in a language he had never learned.  That was news to us all.

Is it alright to ask God for the meaning of my prayer in tongues?

My answer is that while it is not wrong, it is absolutely pointless.  But this arises from a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 14:5, 13  In this section Paul is writing about the comparative vakue to the congregation of speaking in tongues and prophesying.  In the King James Version of the Bible it says that the one who prophesies is greater than the one who seaks in tongues "unless he interprets".  But the original Greek does not mean the person who has spoken in tongues, but someone else.  In verse 13 it is simply comparing prophesy and tongues.  Someone who speaks in togues is of less vakue to the church compared to someone who has the gift of prophecy.  But if he also has a gift of interpretation (of others speaking in tongues) he or she will be valued.

In neither of these verses does it say "Interpret what he has said".

God give different gifts to different peple.  Some have the gift of interpretation by the Holy Spirit.  Those who can speak in a tongue (an unlearned language) should not do so in the congregation unles there is someone present with the gift of interpretation present (14:).

What if there is noone present who has the gift of interpretation?

1 Corinthians 14:28 says, " If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God."

This passage also makes clear that the gist of speaking in tongues is not beyond the control of the person who has that gift.  It should be exercised with discipline.

Is speaking in tongues unimportant - the least valued gift?

The apostle staes that he thanks God that he speaks in tongues more than others (verse 18) and also says, that he wished that all the believers spoke in tongues (verse 5).  This would not make sens if the gift is insignificant.  Paul's writing on the subject in his forstletter to the Corinthians makes clear that is a gift of great value to the person who has it, but of less value ina congregational setting.

Speaking in a language that the Holy Spirit has given and which you do not understand inevitably seems strange if not wierd.  But do not write off this gift, or any of the none manifestations of the Holy Spirit .  We should all seek to be constantly being filled with the Holy Spirit and learn to take the risky step of letting the Holy Spirit have its way.