by Angus Harley

As the heading states, this article comments upon Paul’s teaching on the proper use of tongue speaking in the Corinthian assembly, as taught in 1 Corinthians 14:20-33. I am a Cessationist, and do not believe the biblical gift of tongue speaking continues today. Even so, I will lay aside that belief to look at how the bible in 1 Corinthians 14 refers to the use of tongue speaking. In the last part of the article, I will apply Paul’s principles to Acts 2 and to the modern Continuationist assemblies. This paper assumes that the biblical gift of speaking in tongues was to speak in foreign languages, and that this did not include heavenly languages as claimed by the Continuationists. 

In the earlier part of 1 Corinthians 14, Paul argued that the Corinthians ought to seek the gift of tongues; even so, he continued, they ought to be more zealous to receive the gift of prophecy, for the exercise of tongues speaking by the individual Christian edifies only that Christian, whereas prophecy edifies the whole assembly (vv1-19). Love and corporate edification are the name of the game (v1). 

Paul maintains in that same section that although a Christian may speak in tongues, when he does, he speaks only to himself, since no one knows the meaning of that foreign language. The exception being if the tongue speaker can interpret the language he is speaking. For edification to happen, the mind must be fed with intelligible knowledge, and the understanding engaged and illuminated. Tongue speaking by itself did not do these things, as it merely edified the individual as to his spirit, not in his understanding. In fact, when believers openly and publicly, in the assembly, talk in foreign languages without interpreting them, they sound to the ungifted and to unbelievers as barbarians (vv1-19). This was because these unbelievers heard a cacophony of foreign languages that they could not comprehend. 

20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.  

The tongue-speaking Corinthians were not engaging their own minds, even, choosing to indulge their spirits through personal use of tongues, thereby bypassing the engagement of their own thinking through the interpretation of tongues. Sadly, inevitably, the result was that these tongue speakers did not engage the thinking of those in the assembly who heard them, for they did not hear an intelligible Gospel message (see vv6-12).

Their motive, in other words, was not edification and love, but personal gratification in their own spirits. They were being self-centered, focusing upon the exercise of their gift and not upon the greater virtue of, in love, edifying their brothers and sisters in the Lord. We are reminded of Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 13:1, 11:

“1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal….11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.”

Some think that the exhortation to the Corinthians to be childlike in regard to evil is merely a comparison: ‘If you are going to be childlike, let it not be in your thinking. If you are going to be childlike, let it be in your behavior, to be of an innocent disposition.’ This is perhaps part of Paul’s point, but it is not the main emphasis. Immature thinking was a reality in the Corinthian assembly, for tongue speakers were not engaging their own minds or the minds of others. This in itself, as we saw, was a form of sin and selfish behavior. We can paraphrase Paul’s point, ‘You think that you are serving the Lord by showing off your Spiritual gift of tongue-speaking, but what you are actually doing is indulging in evil self-centeredness. Flee self-centeredness when practicing your gift, and in doing so become childlike or innocent in your motive and behavior.’ Let us not forget that, the Corinthian assembly was notorious for its divisions, in-fighting, and for certain immoral behaviors.

21 In the Law it is written, “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me,” says the Lord. 

The previous interpretation of v20 serves as a bridge to v21, for this verse implies God’s displeasure with the Corinthians. Paul cites Isaiah 28:11-12. The context of Isaiah 28 is that God is about to bring judgment down upon Ephraim for despising Yahweh’s commandments and his path of peace. Soon enough, the Assyrians and Babylonians- the barbarians- would descend on Ephraim, subduing it. They will bark commandments at the Israelites, and due to their foreign languages, they will sound to the Israelites like drunken men with “stammering tongues” (see Isa.33:19; 28:1). Isaiah is citing a part of the Mosaic Law, from Deuteronomy 28:49-50, which refers to God’s curses and judgments that will fall upon a disobedient Israel. 

There’s a twist to the Pauline plot, however. Unlike the Mosaic or Isaianic renditions, Paul’s interpretation targets the Corinthians, not the Jews, and, rather shockingly, the Corinthian tongue speakers are likened not to the rebellious Jews but to the pagan hoards who, with their barbarian babblings, flooded the land of Israel. Those Corinthians selfishly using tongue speaking are akin to the pagan nations, the babbling barbarians. 

22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.

In v22, Paul further explains his use of Isaiah 28 and Deuteronomy 28, by implying that these babbling Corinthians were, in effect, a channel of the judgment of God. They were a sign to unbelievers. How so? 

There were unbelievers coming into the Corinthian assembly. These unbelievers were, in the parallel, the equivalent of the Jews who were imposed upon by the barbarians. This is to say that, the presence of foreign tongues in the assembly was a manifestation (sign) of God’s judgment upon the unbelieving world that was present in the assembly. To paraphrase Paul, ‘Whatever you think you are doing with tongue speaking, know this: by itself, tongue speaking is a sign of God’s judgement on unbelievers.’ How so? The unbelievers would hear the foreign-language babblings, and would not intellectually comprehend anything about God’s Gospel and his love in Christ Jesus. They are kept from understanding the Gospel because of the incomprehensible nature of the mere utterances of foreign languages. In that way, mere tongue speaking without interpretation worked like the somewhat incomprehensible parables that were given in judgment to confirm the ungodly Jews in their unbelief (Matt.13:11-13).

23Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 

If the entire assembly, even, were to indulge in mere incomprehensible tongue speaking, these Corinthians would sound like madmen to the unbelievers and to the “ungifted”. Paul is implying, ‘You think it good to show off the Spirit by indiscriminate, uninterpreted, tongue speaking, but what you are showing is that you are like barbarian madmen! Far from bringing a divine blessing issuing from the Gospel, you are channels of God’s judgment on unbelievers.’

24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.

Whereas, if the Corinthians as a whole were to indulge in prophecy, this would serve the positive goal of presenting a clear and comprehensible Gospel message that would convict the unbeliever and ungifted one. For this teaching would expose the secrets of the unbelievers’ hearts, and they would then respond in humility and declare God’s active presence in the assembly. 

26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. 29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. 30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; 33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

There was no order in the Corinthian assembly, and no one interpreting tongue speaking. Tongue speakers were acting selfishly and were not edifying the assembly out of love by seeking out an interpretation of their tongue speaking. As a result, unbelievers were prevented from hearing the Gospel, too. So, two tongue speakers, or three at most, should rise up to speak in the assembly, but there has to be an interpreter present to make sense of these foreign languages. If an interpreter is not present, the two or three tongue speakers in the assembly should remain quiet and speak in tongues to themselves and unto God.

Application

Acts 2

We see tongue speaking in action in Acts 2. In it, we are informed that the apostles received the gift of tongue speaking, and as a result began to speak in foreign languages to the crowds massed in Jerusalem. The crowd was comprised of different ethnic/language groups. Each group heard the message of “the mighty deeds of God” (v11), which would have been a reference to the events of the Gospel. Peter subsequently addressed the entire crowd, presumably by using an in-common language (Aramaic, or Greek, or Hebrew) and explained the meaning of these mighty deeds to them, as fulfilled in Jesus Christ. 

Were the apostles able to interpret the foreign languages that they used? Some say yes, others say no. The text does not say that they did understand these languages. Moreover, Peter did declare an explanation of the presence of the languages and the message that they conveyed. In Peter’s actions, we see that the use of tongue speaking was interpreted for the crowds. However, instead of two or three in an assembly setting speaking, eleven or twelve were speaking in tongues in public. Moreover, the unbelievers in this case understood the message, as they heard their own languages. 

If speaking in foreign languages that were understood by the crowd led some to mock the use of these languages, how much more the use of foreign languages in the assembly that the unbelievers could not understand?

Continuationists’ unbiblical practice

A vast chunk of Continuationists (those who believe tongue speaking is still going on today) do not follow through on Paul’s specific teaching about the orderly use of foreign languages in the assembly, nor do they look for an interpreter for tongues to be uttered in the first place. Far too many continuationists (not them all) allow the indiscriminate use of so-called tongues.

Other continuationists speak more generally, to say that speaking in tongues is not helpful by itself and they need to be interpreted. However, Paul does not come to the use of tongue speaking with the measurement of ‘helpful’ vs ‘unhelpful’. He shuts down personal tongue speaking if there is no interpreter for the assembly. He does not leave the door open for any potential use of tongue speaking without interpretation.

Far too many continuationist assemblies that do, on paper, believe in an order for tongue speaking, and also believe, on paper, that there must be an interpreter present for tongue speaking to be practiced, do not uphold their own rules. One just needs to go online to see an Assemblies of God assembly as a whole singing in tongues or speaking in tongues, all at the same time. Or, there are more than three speaking gibberish over and over and over, whilst the congregation lifts up its arms, sways, and joins in on the tongue speaking.

Measured by their own Continuationist view of 1 Corinthians, it does not occur to these Continuationists that when Paul’s rules and conditions are broken, they are acting like madmen, barbarians, spewing out babblings, and are preventing the intelligible understanding of the mighty deeds of God in his Son. Nor are they aware that in doing their barbarian babbling, they are acting as vessels of God’s judgment upon unbelievers- again if measured by their own standard.