Main Menu
Spiritual
Gifts
|
PFRS Home > Doctrinal Studies > Spiritual Gifts > The
Purpose of Tongues
The Purpose of Tongues
The Old Testament Prophecy of "Tongues" The outbreak of "tongues" in Acts 2 should not be seen as a strange or surprising occurrence. It was prophesied by Isaiah many years before. In order to understand the purpose and scope of "tongues" in the New Testament, we first need to understand the context of Isaiah 28 which prophesied its coming. Portions of this passage are quoted in the New Testament, and applied to Christ and the Church. For example, Isaiah 28:16, says, "Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste." This verse is quoted in Rom. 9:33, Rom. 10:11 & 1 Pet 2:6. It is referred to in Eph. 2:20. In each case, the writer interpreted this verse as applying to Christ and the New Testament Church. It is a reference to Christ's first coming. To the Jews, this "stone" was a stumbling stone. But, to those who believed, it was the foundation stone on which the Church is built. Paul says in Eph. 2:20 that the "Apostles and prophets" are the foundation of which Christ is the chief cornerstone. Therefore, there is ample evidence that this passage is speaking about the coming of Christ, and the beginning of the New Testament Church. However, this passage contains much more. It was primarily directed at the leadership of Israel during the time of Christ's ministry. It refers to Israel's league with the Romans in crucifying Jesus Christ. And it predicted the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans which occurred in A.D. 70. Isa 28:11-18
Before we go into the "tongues" in verses 11-13, lets examine the rest of this passage in order to fully understand the context. In verse 14, God is addressing the "scornful men" who were the leaders of Israel that delivered Jesus to be crucified. The "covenant with death" was the unholy alliance between the Chief Priests and the Roman officials. The Jewish leaders conspired together to put Jesus to death, and manipulated the Roman officials to carry out their deed. Yet, in verse 16, God says that He will lay the foundation stone, Jesus, who was the cornerstone of the Church. Whoever believed on Him would be saved (vs. 16). But, for the rebellious Jewish leaders, verses 17 & 18 predict their being "trodden down" by the very ones with whom they made their "covenant with death." That is, the Romans would come and destroy them. This occurred some 40 years after Pentecost. This brings us back to verses 11-13. 11 For with stammering
lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
The "Word of the Lord" to these rebellious leaders was the words of Jesus Himself. He spoke to the people in parables, bits and pieces of truth, but in a form that they had difficulty understanding. He taught them "precept upon precept" and "line upon line" over a three year period. Why? So, "that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken." The Gospel accounts agree completley. Mark 4:10-12
Matt 13:10-13
It seems clear from both the Gospel accounts and this passage in Isaiah, that Jesus spoke to the religious leaders in order to condemn them, "that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken" (Isa. 28:13). Clearly then, the context of this passage concerns the condition of Israel at the time of Christ, His preaching to them, and their judgment for rejecting Him. The destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 was clearly God's judgment on Israel for rejecting the Messiah (Luke 19:41-44). This is the context in which we find the prophecy of "tongues" that was fulfilled beginning at Pentecost. Since Isaiah said that through these strange tongues God was going to speak to "this people" (Israel), and in particular to "the scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem," in the context of their impending judgment, it is apparent that "tongues" was the sign to unbelieving Israel of this judgment that was fulfilled in AD70. Since Paul quoted directly from these verses, let's let Him explain the connection to "tongues" as a New Testament gift of the Spirit. The Purpose of "Tongues" According to Paul 1 Cor 14:18-22
In explaining the purpose for "tongues," Paul quoted from Isa. 28:11,12 where God told Israel that He was sending them a sign of judgment - people speaking a strange tongue. This would be a sign to the "scornful men" who ruled His people Israel. When we look at Acts 2, where "tongues" first made an appearance, we see clearly that this sign was actually fulfilled. The Jews were baffled that these Galaleans were speaking in strange languages to them. After quoting this passage, Paul wrote, "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers." In effect, Paul said, in this manner, (i.e. as God prophesied Israel's judgment) tongues are for a sign FOR UNBELIEVING ISRAEL, a sign of God's impending judgment on the leaders of Israel. In A.D. 70 the Temple was destroyed and the priesthood and Sanhedrin were disbanded, and the remainder of this prophecy was fulfilled. Therefore, the prophesied purpose of "tongues" ceased in AD 70. There were no rulers of Israel after that. Israel ceased to be a governed nation. Isaiah wrote about the coming judgment on Israel. But, God would not punish the believing remnant of Israel (the NT Church). Isa 28:5
The "remnant" is always seen in the Old Testament as the smaller group of believers within Israel (in contrast to the rest of the nation who were rebellious). At the time of Christ, the nation of Israel had to choose between following Christ, or following their rebellious leaders. Only a small remnant of Israel followed Christ (the disciples and a few others). Of the rest of the nation and its leaders God said: Isa 28:7-8
To the rulers of His people, God said: Isa 28:11-14
Notice the above verses actually tell us the exact message given in tongues to Israel. Those who spoke in tongues basically said, "This is the rest with which you may cause the weary to rest," and, "This is the refreshing." In other words, the miracle of foreign tongues was itself the sign, but also the messages being spoken in tongues told the people that THIS GOSPEL being preached by Peter and the early Christians was indeed the hope of Israel, the New Covenant, whereby they could rest from the burden of the Law. This was the "wonderful works of God" that the crowd heard every man in his own tongue. No doubt this "rest" is what Jesus referred to as well when He spoke of giving them "rest for their souls." Tongues were given to many believers in the Churches after Pentecost. But, the purpose of tongues never changed. When Gentile Christians spoke in tongues, it was still a sign to the Jews living in those communities. The message was still, "This is the refreshing" and "this is the rest." The exercising of this gift was a continuous sign that the destruction of the Jewish leaders and their system was imminent. This was well known by the early Church, since Jesus had predicted the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in remarkably clear language (Luke 19:41-44). So widespread was the gift of tongues, that it had begun to dominate the gatherings in the Corinthian church. Paul's correction of that church in 1 Cor. 14 is entirely in keeping with the stated purpose for tongues. The End of Tongues 1 Cor 13:8-10
Three things are said to end in verse 8 - prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. These were all spiritual gifts mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament. Paul wrote that "prophecy" and "knowledge" would be "done away" at some point, when the "perfect" comes. The words "done away" were translated from the Greek word "katargêthêsontai," (future passive of katargeô). Essentially, it means to be made inoperative by something else. Verse 10 tells us what will cause prophecy and knowledge to be made inoperative - when "that which is perfect is come." This would occur at a distinct point in time. When "that which is perfect is come" that is when "prophecy" and "knowledge" will be done away. However, in the case of tongues, Paul used a different word. He wrote, "tongues shall cease." The word "cease" is the Greek word "pausontai," (future middle indicative of pauô). A.T. Robertson says this means "they shall make themselves cease or automatically cease of themselves." There is a huge difference between the two Greek words. Essentially, "katargêthêsontai" means to be caused to cease by something else (in this case the coming of "that which is perfect"), but "pausontai" means to cease of its own accord (not halted by something else). This means that unlike "prophecy" and "knowledge," "tongues" would NOT cease at the same time, when "that which is perfect is come." In fact, if tongues ceases of itself, its cessation cannot be connected with the coming of "that which is perfect" at all! That Paul was not speaking of tongues ceasing when "that which is perfect is come," is also clear from verse 9. He ONLY mentioned "prophecy" and "knowledge" as being "in part," and being done away when "that which is perfect is come" in verse 10. Notice he never said that "tongues" was "in part," or connected its cessation in any way with the coming of "that which is perfect." This begs the question, when does/did tongues cease? If the coming of "that which is perfect" does not cause tongues to cease, then logic demands that "tongues" either ceased earlier, or else will continue after "that which is perfect is come." Had Paul meant that tongues would continue into the Millennium it seems rather odd that Paul would bother to mention it as ceasing at all. Why? Because there would be no apparent end in view. If tongues continue in the Millennium, then Paul's point, that faith, hope and love continue after the gifts end, would not be made from his mentioning "tongues." His mention of "tongues" would not be an effective example to make his point. Furthermore, Paul wrote in the next chapter that "tongues" are a sign for unbelievers not believers. This would seem a bit redundant in the Millennium, with Jesus Himself present! Therefore, to be consistent with Paul's point and with the grammar of the Greek text, we must understand that tongues would cease of its own accord PRIOR to the coming of "that which is perfect." Since Paul indicated in 1 Cor. 14:21-22 that "tongues" were the fulfillment of Isaiah 28, once the PURPOSE for tongues ended there could be no more sign. And, as Paul indicated in 1 Cor. 13, "tongues" would cease of itself. That is, it just faded away. From the biblical data, we can assume that those with the gift still had it, but it was no longer given to others on an ongoing basis. The destruction of Jerusalem did not itself cause tongues to cease. But, the fulfillment of the prophecy of which tongues were the sign, in effect made tongues no longer necessary or effective. Its purpose had been accomplished. And so it simply ceased of its own accord. Church history bears this out. Tongues did indeed cease at about AD 70 or shortly thereafter. There is some mention of it in the second century, but ONLY among heretical groups like the Montanists. There is no indication from the Apostolic Fathers that "tongues" continued in the orthodox churches founded by the Apostles after those who knew the Apostles had all died off. The Revival of Tongues Modern Tongues In Scripture, "tongues" were known languages foreign to the speaker, but meant to be understood by people present as a sign. This was the case in Acts 2. And it was also true in the other occurrences of tongues in Acts. Not once do we find a case where tongues were spoken as some kind of "heavenly language." Yet, today's "tongues" are basically gibberish. Rarely do we hear claims that modern tongues were actually understood by the people present. And verifying the few claims that do exist has proven illusive. Neither do most churches who claim to exercise the genuine gift of tongues follow the Scriptural guidelines in 1 Cor. 14. I am NOT saying that every person who "speaks in tongues" is doing something evil. We cannot be judges of individual experiences. God is not limited by the past. He can do whatever He wants whenever He wants. He can do something again that has ceased in the past. And He might even give such a gift to sincere believers who in their ignorance of Scripture believe it is a necessary sign of their receiving the Holy Spirit. For that matter, He could even restore the sign of tongues on a large scale now that Israel is a nation again, as a sign of the Tribulation and Day of the Lord to come. My point is ONLY that the gift of tongues in the New Testament has indeed ceased. Whether or not God has or might revive it, or whether there are exceptions, is another question altogether. At any rate, biblically and historically, it simply cannot be seen as "the sign" that someone has been saved or received the Holy Spirit. It was never used as such in Acts, although it did accompany salvation in at least one case, and baptism in another. The Bible explicetly states that it was NOT a sign for believers. The stated purpose for tongues was to be the sign of the impending destruction of Jerusalem for the leaders of Israel who crucified Christ. Some Objections Considered 1 Cor 14:2-4
The first question concerns the possibility of another kind of "tongues" besides what occurred at Pentecost. This other alleged kind of "tongues" is said to be a "prayer language," and is commonly taught among Charismatic and Pentecostal groups. They think verse 2 above indicates that "tongues" should be used in prayer. However, Paul's point was not that this was the purpose of tongues. Rather, because of the massive confusion in the Corinthian church, with many people speaking in tongues at the same time, and there being no interpretations given for the hearers, no one understood the tongues. The effect of the wrong use of tongues by the Corinthian church was that no one besides God knew what was being spoken. Rather than the whole church being edified, only the speaker was edified. In this chapter, Paul was restricting the use of tongues in the Church because its improper use by them did not edify the whole congregation. His comment, that those who speak in tongues in the church are edifying themselves, is not a positive statement, but a negative one. The same is true of his statement that only God knew what they were saying. This was a sharp rebuke. Speaking in tongues in the congregation, with many people speaking simultainously and with no interpretations being offered, was mass confusion because no one was edified except the speaker! And no one knew what was being said but God alone! Paul wanted all things to be done unto edification of the entire church. That was not happening at Corinth, because of all the confusion. Granted, one with the gift of tongues could pray or even sing using this gift. But, that is not the sole purpose of the gift. The purpose was a sign to the unbelieving of Israel. Here is my paraphrase of what Paul was actually saying in the above verses: "The person speaking in a foreign tongue in your services is not
speaking for the benefit of the whole church. He is really speaking only
to God, because nobody can understand what he is saying! (even though he
is speaking mysteries of the spirit). Those speaking in tongues are only edifying themselves!
Paul was drawing a contrast between their exercise of "tongues" and "prophesy," between what was actually prevailing in their services (in red), and the ideal situation which Paul was encouraging (in green). Prophecy was much to be preferred, because it was done in the common tongue, and all could understand and be edified, exhorted, and comforted. Tongues, on the other hand, benefitted no one except the speaker unless there was an interpretation given for every utterance. God alone knew what was being said. The speaker was indeed exercising his gift, but to no profit for anyone else. Paul did not forbid the use of tongues in the gatherings. But he did restrict its use to only two or three, in turn, and only with an interpretation being given in the common tongue (Greek). In this way, tongues could also edify the whole congregation. The purpose of tongues was a sign to the lost, not to believers. Its role was primarily outside the assembled congregation of believers. But, it could be used within the meetings, provided an interpreter was present, in case unbelievers did come into their services (vs. 23-24). And with the use of the interpreter, this gift as well could still edify the whole congregation, not just unbelievers. Paul also mentioned briefly that tongues might be used in both prayer and singing. 1 Cor 14:15-17
While Paul did permit both praying and singing in tongues in the church meetings, he still kept the focus on interpretation so that the whole congregation could understand the prayer (or song). Verse 16 indicates that even prayer and singing in foreign tongues must be interpreted into the common tongue. Otherwise, how could those who are unlearned in that particular language say "amen" to the giving of thanks in prayer or song? It is apparent then, that there is but one kind of "tongues" in Scripture, the same "tongues" witnessed by the crowd of Jews at Pentecost. There is only one kind of "tongues" mentioned in Acts, and in 1 Corinthians. It is not a "prayer language," that can be spoken by anyone in private prayer — a kind of babbling of unintelligible sounds. The kind of "tongues" that require an interpreter in the church services is the same kind of "tongues" used in public prayer. And even then (in prayer and singing) tongues still requires an interpreter for the benefit of the whole congregation. In verse 15 above, Paul told them that if they exercise "tongues" they must also add to it interpretation. That is what "pray in the spirit" AND "pray with the understanding" means. If you have tongues you must also have interpretation so that the whole congregation can say "amen" to your giving thanks. 2. Heavenly Language Myth
1 Cor 13:1-3
Paul was using hyperbole here, not speaking literally, just as Jesus did when He spoke of plucking out the eye, or cutting off the hand. Paul did not expect anyone to speak with the language of angels any more than he expected any of them to do the other things in this passage. Did anyone speak in ALL known languages? No. Did anyone possess ALL knowledge and wisdom, and could remove mountains at will? No. Did anyone give away all that they had to feed the poor, and then offer their body to be burned? No, of course not. Paul was using the most extreme things imaginable in order to show that even if someone could do all these things, it means absolutely nothing without love. That he included speaking in angelic languages in his list of hypothetical hyperbole is an indication that they did NOT speak with angelic tongues, just as they did not actually do the other things listed. Otherwise Paul's hypothetical hyperbolic list loses its intended shock value. |